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 |
Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR): a comparative study between powered and non-powered technique
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40463-015-0109-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Islam Herzallah, Bassam Alzuraiqi, Naif Bawazeer, Osama Marglani, Ameen Alherabi, Sherif K. Mohamed, Khalid Al-Qahtani, Talal Al-Khatib, Abdullah Alghamdi |
| Abstract |
Dacrocystorhinostomy (DCR) is an operation used to treat nasolacrimal duct obstruction. Essentially there are two approaches: external and endoscopic. Several modalities are used in endoscopic DCR; all aiming to improve success rate, reduce complications, and shorten operative time. Both kerrison punch and drill are widely used in endoscopic DCR with non-conclusive knowledge about differences in operative details as well as on the outcome. The aim of this study is to compare between powered (drill) and non-powered (kerrison punch) DCR to clarify the superiority of one over the other. A retrospective chart review of 59 patients who underwent endoscopic DCR procedure at our institution from June 2013 until July 2014 (34 kerrison punch and 32 powered drill). Operative details, surgical outcome and complications were compared between both groups. A total of 66 endoscopic DCRs were performed on 59 patients. Procedure success rate among kerrison punch group was 87.88 % vs. 90.9 % in powered drill group (p = 0.827), while complications for both groups were statistical not significant (p = 0.91). The mean operating time among kerrison punch group was significantly lower than in powered drill group (75 min vs. 125 min, p = 0.0001). Kerrison punch showed significant reduction in operating time when compared to powered drill for endoscopic DCR. No statistically significant difference was found between both groups regarding procedures' success rate and complication. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 24% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 70% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 27% |
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 24 December 2015.
All research outputs
#17,348,916
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery
#321
of 629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,746
of 396,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery
#7
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 396,995 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.