↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Management of chronic pain after hernia repair

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Management of chronic pain after hernia repair
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, April 2018
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s127820
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristoffer Andresen, Jacob Rosenberg

Abstract

Chronic pain following inguinal hernia repair is a common problem and feared complication. Up to 16% of people experience chronic pain following the repair of a groin hernia. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of treatment strategies for patients with chronic pain following inguinal hernia repair based on best practice guidelines and current clinical routines. The optimal management of chronic pain following inguinal hernia surgery should begin with a thorough clinical examination to rule out other causes of chronic pain and to rule out a recurrence. A scaled approach to treatment is recommended. Initially, watchful waiting can be tried if it can be tolerated by the patient and then systemic painkillers, escalating to blocks, and surgery as the final option. Surgery should include mesh removal and triple neurectomy following anterior approaches or mesh and tack removal following a posterior approach. The diagnosis and treatment strategies should be performed by or discussed with experts in the field.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 20%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 05 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,136,143
of 15,637,225 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#135
of 1,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,330
of 280,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#8
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,637,225 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 280,224 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 73% of its contemporaries.