| Title |
Role of Serratiopeptidase After Surgical Removal of Impacted Molar: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12663-017-0996-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gowri Sivaramakrishnan, Kannan Sridharan |
| Abstract |
Serratiopeptidase for pain, facial swelling and trismus associated with surgical removal of impacted molar is under investigation. However conclusive evidence on the use of serratiopeptidase is lacking. Hence a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies was carried out. Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies and necessary data extracted. The data were analysed using non-Cochrane mode in RevMan 5.0. 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to represent the deviation from the point estimate. The heterogeneity between the studies was assessed using Forest plot visually, I2 statistics and Chi square test with a statistical P value of <0.10 to indicate statistical significance. Random-effect models were used in case of moderate to severe heterogeneity. Five studies were included for final review. Serratiopeptidase improved trismus better than corticosteroids with the MD, 95% as 4.42 [3.84, 5]. As regards to swelling, no significant difference was observed for serratiopeptidase when compared to corticosteroids. Paucity of studies precludes any conclusion for other outcome measures as well as for other comparator drugs. Serratiopeptidase could be used safely and effectively to improve trismus and facial swelling after surgical removal of impacted molar. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 November 2020.
All research outputs
#7,867,149
of 25,186,033 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
#46
of 287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,164
of 429,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,186,033 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 287 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 429,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.