↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

A randomized crossover study comparing trehalose/hyaluronate eyedrops and standard treatment: patient satisfaction in the treatment of dry eye syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
A randomized crossover study comparing trehalose/hyaluronate eyedrops and standard treatment: patient satisfaction in the treatment of dry eye syndrome
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2015
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s77091
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Stolz, Juan Carlos Pinto-Bonilla, Alberto Del Olmo-Jimeno, Fernando Llovet Osuna, Emiliano Hernandez Galilea

Abstract

Dry eye is a common disorder in routine ophthalmological practice, and a better understanding of the complex pathophysiology is leading to improved treatment. Thealoz Duo(®) is a novel artificial tear preparation containing two active ingredients: Trehalose, a naturally occurring disaccharide with anhydrobiotic functions in many organisms, and hyaluronate, a widely distributed anionic glycosaminoglycan polysaccharide with lubricative and water-retaining properties in biological systems. In a randomized, single center, open label, crossover study, 17 adult patients with moderate-to-severe dry eye syndrome were randomized to treatment with Thealoz Duo(®) (combining trehalose and hyaluronic acid) or Systane(®). Patients received 7 days of treatment. The primary efficacy variable was patient satisfaction evaluated by a 0-100 visual analog scale evaluated on days 0 and 7 of treatment. Secondary parameters included ocular surface disease index (OSDI), symptoms of dry eye, ocular staining scores (fluorescein and lissamine green), ocular clinical signs, Schirmer test, tear breakup time, and global efficacy assessed by the patient and the investigator. Seventeen patients were included. Patient satisfaction improved from 44.5±19.0 to 70.2±19.2 mm during Thealoz Duo(®) treatment and from 47.2±23 to 57.1±19.1 mm during Systane(®) treatment (P=0.043, mixed-effects analysis of covariance). Two secondary efficacy parameters (dry eye symptoms and the impact of their symptoms on work) showed statistically significant advantages for Thealoz Duo(®) over Systane(®). There were no statistically significant advantages for Systane(®) over Thealoz Duo(®) for any measured parameter. No adverse events were reported. Thealoz Duo(®) appears to be an effective combination of two active ingredients for the treatment of dry eye and is at least as effective as Systane(®).

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 70 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Master 9 13%
Other 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 19 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 31%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 10%
Engineering 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 23 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,623,522
of 12,485,238 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#231
of 922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,060
of 265,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#6
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,485,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 922 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 265,699 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.