↓ Skip to main content

Outcomes of Buccinator Treatment With Botulinum Toxin in Facial Synkinesis

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
6 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
56 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.
Article details
Title
Outcomes of Buccinator Treatment With Botulinum Toxin in Facial Synkinesis
Published in
JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, May 2018
DOI 10.1001/jamafacial.2017.1385
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The buccinator, despite being a prominent midface muscle, has been previously overlooked as a target in the treatment of facial synkinesis with botulinum toxin. To evaluate outcomes of patients treated with botulinum toxin to the buccinator muscle in the setting of facial synkinesis. Prospective cohort study of patients who underwent treatment for facial synkinesis with botulinum toxin over multiple treatment cycles during a 1-year period was carried out in a tertiary referral center. Botulinum toxin treatment of facial musculature, including treatment cycles with and without buccinator injections. Subjective outcomes were evaluated using the Synkinesis Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) prior to injection of botulinum toxin and 2 weeks after treatment. Outcomes of SAQ preinjection and postinjection scores were compared in patients who had at least 1 treatment cycle with and without buccinator injections. Subanalysis was performed on SAQ questions specific to buccinator function (facial tightness and lip movement). Of 84 patients who received botulinum toxin injections for facial synkinesis, 33 received injections into the buccinator muscle. Of the 33, 23 met inclusion criteria (19 [82.6%] women; mean [SD] age, 46 [10] years). These patients presented for 82 treatment visits, of which 44 (53.6%) involved buccinator injections and 38 (46.4%) were without buccinator injections. The most common etiology of facial paralysis included vestibular schwannoma (10 [43.5%] participants) and Bell Palsy (9 [39.1%] participants). All patients had improved posttreatment SAQ scores compared with prebotulinum scores regardless of buccinator treatment. Compared with treatment cycles in which the buccinator was not addressed, buccinator injections resulted in lower total postinjection SAQ scores (45.9; 95% CI, 38.8-46.8; vs 42.8; 95% CI, 41.3-50.4; P = .43) and greater differences in prebotox and postbotox injection outcomes (18; 95% CI, 16.2-21.8; vs 19; 95% CI, 14.2-21.8; P = .73). Subanalysis of buccinator-specific scores revealed significantly improved postbotox injection scores with the addition of buccinator injections (5.7; 95% CI, 5.0-6.4; vs 4.1; 95% CI, 3.7-4.6; P = .004) and this corresponded to greater differences between prebotulinum and postbotulinum injection scores (3.3; 95% CI, 2.7-3.9; vs 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-2.6; P = .02). The duration of botulinum toxin effect was similar both with and without buccinator treatment (66.8; 95% CI, 61.7-69.6; vs 65.7; 95% CI, 62.5-71.1; P = .72). The buccinator is a symptomatic muscle in the facial synkinesis population. Treatment with botulinum toxin is safe, effective and significantly improves patient symptoms. 3.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 26 46%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 26 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 19 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,691,514
of 29,686,237 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery
#123
of 690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,711
of 350,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,686,237 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 350,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 58% of its contemporaries.