You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Topical therapy with high-volume budesonide nasal irrigations in difficult-to-treat chronic rhinosinusitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.bjorl.2015.03.014 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eduardo Macoto Kosugi, Guilherme Figner Moussalem, Juliana Caminha Simões, Rafael de Paula e Silva Felici de Souza, Vitor Guo Chen, Paulo Saraceni Neto, José Arruda Mendes Neto |
| Abstract |
Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is termed difficult-to-treat when patients do not reach acceptable level of control despite adequate surgery, intranasal corticosteroid treatment and up to 2 short courses of systemic antibiotics or corticosteroids in the preceding year. Recently, high-volume corticosteroid nasal irrigations have been recommended for CRS treatment. To assess high-volume budesonide nasal irrigations for difficult-to-treat CRS. Prospective uncontrolled intervention trial. Participants were assessed before- and 3 months after nasal irrigation with 1mg of budesonide in 500mL of saline solution daily for 2 days. Subjective (satisfactory clinical improvement) and objective (SNOT-22 questionnaire and Lund-Kennedy endoscopic scores) assessments were performed. Sixteen patients were included, and 13 (81.3%) described satisfactory clinical improvement. SNOT-22 mean scores (50.2-29.6; p=0.006) and Lund-Kennedy mean scores (8.8-5.1; p=0.01) improved significantly. Individually, 75% of patients improved SNOT-22 scores, and 75% improved Lund-Kennedy scores after high volume budesonide nasal irrigations. High-volume corticosteroid nasal irrigations are a good option in difficult-to-treat CRS control of disease, reaching 81.3% success control and significant improvement of SNOT-22 and Lund-Kennedy scores. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Romania | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 24% |
| Unknown | 15 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 59% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 19 | 32% |
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 21 April 2018.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
#574
of 726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,242
of 279,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
#120
of 140 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 726 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. 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 279,002 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 140 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.