| Title |
Treatment satisfaction in cystic fibrosis: early patient experience with tobramycin inhalation powder
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s102234 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathan Greenberg, Jacqueline B Palmer, Wing W Chan, Catherine E Correia, Diane Whalley, Paul Shannon, Gregory S Sawicki |
| Abstract |
This study assessed treatment satisfaction of cystic fibrosis (CF) patients in a routine clinical setting for tobramycin inhalation powder (TIP), the first dry powder-inhaled antibiotic for Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. CF patients aged 6 years or older treated with at least one cycle of TIP completed a web survey on experience with TIP, including the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). Regression analysis determined the factors associated with TSQM global satisfaction. Eighty patients (mean age ± standard deviation: 24.4±9.4 years; 57.5% female; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second ± standard deviation: 67.1%±27.3% predicted) completed the survey. The majority expressed satisfaction with TIP's administration time (100%), time to clean (97.1%), portability (97.1%), and ease of use (94.3%). Effectiveness was significantly associated with TSQM global satisfaction (regression R-squared: 0.54). Patient preferences for TIP were based on administration time and ease of use. Global satisfaction was related to greater patient-perceived effectiveness. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 35% |
| Psychology | 3 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 October 2016.
All research outputs
#7,302,411
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#523
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,709
of 332,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#23
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 332,576 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 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 65% of its contemporaries.