↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Practice patterns of ophthalmologists administering intravitreal injections in Europe: a longitudinal survey

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Practice patterns of ophthalmologists administering intravitreal injections in Europe: a longitudinal survey
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, December 2016
DOI 10.2147/opth.s117801
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kui Huang, Marla B Sultan, Duo Zhou, Charles S Tressler, Jingping Mo

Abstract

This study was performed to understand the practice patterns of ophthalmologists administering intravitreal (IVT) injections in Europe after the procedure became routine. As part of a prospective, multinational, non-interventional cohort study in 13 countries in Europe between 2006 and 2012, ophthalmologists completed the Baseline Questionnaire and the Follow-up Questionnaire 1 year after baseline. Of the 125 ophthalmologists who participated in the study, 113 (90.4%) completed the Baseline Questionnaire. Most of these ophthalmologists were medical retina specialists (43.0%). The median number of IVT injections that the ophthalmologists performed per month during the year prior to completing the Baseline Questionnaire was 20.0. The majority of the ophthalmologists had performed their last IVT injection prior to completing the questionnaire in an operating room or theater (68.4%). When performing IVT injections, a majority of the ophthalmologists reported applying povidone-iodine (90.4%) before IVT injections and topical antibiotics right after IVT injections (89.5%). In addition, 81.6% of the ophthalmologists reported using a sterile adhesive eye drape and 80.7% reported using an eyelid speculum. In all, 95 ophthalmologists (76%) completed the Follow-up Questionnaire. The median number of IVT injections performed per month during the year prior to completing the Follow-up Questionnaire by these ophthalmologists was increased to 35. The results of the Follow-up Questionnaire on administering IVT injections were similar to those of the Baseline Questionnaire. A majority of the ophthalmologists reported applying povidone-iodine (87.4%) before IVT injections, topical antibiotics right after IVT injections (89.5%), and an eyelid speculum (85.3%). The results of this study indicated a good adherence to all aspects of the guidelines on IVT injections. It seemed that ophthalmologists were more experienced in IVT injections after they became a routine treatment procedure.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Student > Master 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 42%
Psychology 1 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 December 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,475
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#297,831
of 416,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#29
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 416,449 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.