↓ Skip to main content

Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Comparative Study of Different Treatment Modalities

Overview of attention for article published in International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 646)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
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.
Title
Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Comparative Study of Different Treatment Modalities
Published in
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, September 2017
DOI 10.1055/s-0037-1605376
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ahmed Khater, Mohammad Waheed El-Anwar, Ahmad Abdel-Fattah Nofal, Atef Taha Elbahrawy

Abstract

Introduction  Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is hearing loss of at least 30 dB in at least 3 contiguous frequencies within at least 72 hours. There are many different theories to explain it, and many different modalities are used for its management, such as: systemic steroids (SSs), intratympanic steroid injection (ITSI), hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HOT), antiviral drugs, and vasodilators or vasoactive substances. Objectives  This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the combination of the most common treatment modalities of ISSNHL and to compare the results if HOT was not one of the treatment modalities administered. Methods  The study was conducted with 22 ISSNHL patients with ages ranging from 34 to 58 years. The patients were divided into 2 groups; group A included 11 patients managed by SSs, ITSI, antiviral therapy, and HOT simultaneously, and group B included 11 patients exposed to the aforementioned modalities, with the exception of HOT. Results  After one month, all of the patients in group A showed total improvement in hearing in all frequencies, with pure tone average (PTA) of 18.1 ± 2.2, while in group B, 5/11 (45.5%) patients showed total improvement, and 6 /11 (54.5%) patients showed partial improvement, with a total mean PTA of 28.1 ± 8.7. Conclusion  The early administration of HOT in combination with other clinically approved modalities (SSs, ITSI, antiviral therapy) provides better results than the administration of the same modalities, with the exception of HOT, in the treatment of ISSNHL.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 21%
Student > Postgraduate 6 14%
Other 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Unspecified 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 29 October 2021.
All research outputs
#4,569,080
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#31
of 646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,774
of 315,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 646 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 315,984 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.