| Title |
Improved quality of life in adults undergoing tonsillectomy for recurrent tonsillitis. Is adult tonsillectomy really a low priority treatment?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-012-2095-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harry R. F. Powell, N. Mehta, N. Daly, G. W. R. Watters |
| Abstract |
There is a paucity of studies on patient-reported outcome measures in adult tonsillectomy. Our aim was to add to the body of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) evidence on adult tonsillectomy at a time when this intervention is being branded a low priority treatment in the United Kingdom (UK). We designed a prospective questionnaire study that was carried out in two UK district general hospitals. 41 patients were recruited into the study and completed a pre-operative short form 36 questionnaire. All 41 were contacted at least 1 year after tonsillectomy and were asked to complete the same SF-36 questionnaire and three additional HRQOL questions. There was a significant improvement in quality of life shown by both the mean SF-36 scores and the HRQOL questions. The SF-36 summary measures and the total SF-36 scores improved significantly (p < 0.01). The study emphasises the importance of tonsillectomy being available on the National Health Service to adults with recurrent tonsillitis. This proven quality of life improvement is also highly likely to confer a secondary health economic benefit from less GP attendances and fewer missed work days. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Argentina | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 May 2013.
All research outputs
#7,169,303
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#409
of 3,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,878
of 165,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#6
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,194 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 165,492 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 69% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.