| Title |
Intraocular pressure dynamics with prostaglandin analogs: a clinical application of water-drinking test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s108456 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pelin Özyol, Erhan Özyol, Ercan Baldemir |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the clinical applicability of the water-drinking test in treatment-naive primary open-angle glaucoma patients. Twenty newly diagnosed primary open-angle glaucoma patients and 20 healthy controls were enrolled in this prospective study. The water-drinking test was performed at baseline and 6 weeks and 3 months after prostaglandin analog treatment. Peak and fluctuation of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained with the water-drinking test during follow-up were analyzed. Analysis of variance for repeated measures and paired and unpaired t-tests were used for statistical analysis. The mean baseline IOP values in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma were 25.1±4.6 mmHg before prostaglandin analog treatment, 19.8±3.7 mmHg at week 6, and 17.9±2.2 mmHg at month 3 after treatment. The difference in mean baseline IOP of the water-drinking tests was statistically significant (P<0.001). At 6 weeks of prostaglandin analog treatment, two patients had high peak and fluctuation of IOP measurements despite a reduction in baseline IOP. After modifying treatment, patients had lower peak and fluctuation of IOP values at month 3 of the study. Peak and fluctuation of IOP in response to the water-drinking test were lower with prostaglandin analogs compared with before medication. The water-drinking test can represent an additional benefit in the management of glaucoma patients, especially by detecting higher peak and fluctuation of IOP values despite a reduced mean IOP. Therefore, it could be helpful as a supplementary method in monitoring IOP in the clinical practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 20% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 40% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
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 26 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,803
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,605
of 367,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#43
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 367,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.