| Title |
Lidocaine 5% patch for localized neuropathic pain: progress for the patient, a new approach for the physician
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cpaa.s9795 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guy Hans, Dominique Robert, Johanna Verhulst, Marcel Vercauteren |
| Abstract |
Neuropathic pain (NeP) syndromes remain a difficult-to-treat medical entity. Despite a growing number of pharmacological and invasive analgesic therapies the results remain less than optimal because of insufficient analgesic efficacy and/or occurrence of pronounced side effects. Current guidelines propose the use of multimodal and balanced pharmacological therapies, focused on the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms (mechanistic approach). Lidocaine 5% patches are a new treatment option currently licensed for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia. However, these patches can also be used for the treatment of different types of superficial NeP syndromes, such as diabetic polyneuropathy. Their therapeutic success, however, largely depends on the correct identification of appropriate patients and pain syndromes. This manuscript outlines the correct identification of patients and proper use of these patches in order to ensure as much as possible the therapeutic efficacy of this new treatment option. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 27% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 64% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
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 10 December 2019.
All research outputs
#17,604,528
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications
#118
of 180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,384
of 104,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 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 180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 104,001 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.