| Title |
A national evaluation of the management practices of hemorrhoidal disease in the Netherlands
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Colorectal Disease, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00384-018-3019-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robin R. van Tol, Marieke P. A. Bruijnen, Jarno Melenhorst, Sander M. J. van Kuijk, Laurents P. S. Stassen, Stéphanie O. Breukink |
| Abstract |
In this study, we describe current practices in the management of hemorrhoidal disease in the Netherlands. A validated online survey was performed among Dutch surgeons and residents treating hemorrhoidal disease. Contact details were retrieved from the Dutch Association for Surgery resulting in 619 contacts. Only doctors who were treating hemorrhoidal disease regularly were asked to complete the questionnaire. The following items were assessed: initial treatment, recurrence, complications, and follow-up. In total, 133 respondents completed the survey. Ninety percent of the respondents started with rubber band ligation (RBL) as the first treatment in low-grade hemorrhoidal disease. In case of recurrence, 64% of the respondents repeated RBL three times before switching to a more invasive treatment modality. In grade III hemorrhoidal disease, the respondents preferred more invasive techniques: a sutured hemorrhoidopexy was performed in 24%, Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation (DG-HAL) in 9%, stapled hemorrhoidopexy in 19%, and the traditional hemorrhoidectomy in 31% of the patients, respectively. The majority of the respondents (39%) reported a mild complication in 5-10% of the patients. The most reported complication was pain. Nearly all the respondents (98%) reported a major complication in less than 5% of the patients. The majority of the patients (57%) were seen in outpatient clinics 6 weeks post-treatment. This Dutch survey showed areas of common practice for primary treatment of hemorrhoidal disease. However, it also demonstrated varying practices regarding recurrent hemorrhoidal disease. Practical guidelines are required to support colorectal surgeons in the Netherlands. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 17% |
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 51% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 17 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,485,225
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#1,440
of 1,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,862
of 333,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#36
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,844 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.