↓ Skip to main content

Hearing outcome does not depend on the interval of intratympanic steroid administration in idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Hearing outcome does not depend on the interval of intratympanic steroid administration in idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00405-016-3930-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hideaki Suzuki, Hiroki Koizumi, Jun-ichi Ohkubo, Nobusuke Hohchi, Shoji Ikezaki, Takuro Kitamura

Abstract

We studied the effect of intratympanic steroid administration with different intervals on hearing outcomes in patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL). The subjects were 197 consecutive patients (197 ears) with ISSNHL (hearing level ≥40 dB, interval between onset and treatment ≤30 days). They received systemic administration of prednisolone (100 mg followed by tapered doses) combined with intratympanic injection of dexamethasone (4 mg/ml). Intratympanic injection was performed once a week for 4 weeks in 105 patients (long-interval group), or 4 times in 1 week in 92 patients (short-interval group). The hearing outcomes were evaluated at two points of time: 1 week from the start of treatment, and 1-2 months after the completion of treatment when the hearing level reached a plateau. There was no significant difference in the cure rate, marked-recovery rate, recovery rate, hearing gain, hearing level, or percent hearing improvement between the long- and short-interval groups at either point of time. Multiple regression analysis also showed that the final hearing level did not depend on the interval of intratympanic steroid injection. These results indicate that the hearing outcome of ISSNHL does not improve even if the interval of intratympanic injection is shortened. This implies that a lower total number of intratympanic steroid injections may be as effective as the present protocol.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

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 %
Other 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Researcher 4 17%
Professor 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 September 2016.
All research outputs
#18,441,836
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#1,642
of 3,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#292,611
of 403,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#28
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,073 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 403,162 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.