↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Systematic clinical evidence review of NASHA (Durolane hyaluronic acid) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews , May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#33 of 192)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Systematic clinical evidence review of NASHA (Durolane hyaluronic acid) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis
Published in
Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews , May 2018
DOI 10.2147/oarrr.s162127
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ross Leighton, Jane Fitzpatrick, Helen Smith, Daniela Crandall, Carl R Flannery, Thierry Conrozier

Abstract

Pain and limitations in joint mobility associated with knee osteoarthritis (OA) are clinically challenging to manage, and advanced progression of disease can often lead to total knee arthroplasty. Intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid (HA), also referred to as viscosupplementation, is a non-surgical treatment approach for OA, the effectiveness of which may depend on the HA composition, and the length of time over which it resides in the joint. One of the available options for such therapies includes NASHA (Durolane HA), a non-animal, biofermentation-derived product, which is manufactured using a process that stabilizes the HA molecules to slow down their rate of degradation and produce a unique formulation with a terminal half-life of ~1 month. The objectives of the current review were to assess, in patients with OA of the knee, the efficacy and safety of intra-articular treatment with NASHA relative to control (saline) injections, other HA products, and other injectables (corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma, mesenchymal stem cells). This systematic evidence review examines patient outcomes following NASHA treatment as described in published data from studies conducted in subjects with knee OA. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses-compliant literature search strategy yielded 11 eligible clinical studies with a variety of comparator arms. Outcomes assessed at various time points following intra-articular treatment included measures of pain, function, quality of life, and incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AEs). The available evidence reported for the clinical studies assessed demonstrates sustained and effective relief of knee OA symptoms following a single injection of NASHA. In addition, an excellent biocompatibility profile is observed for NASHA as an intra-articular therapy for OA, as reflected by the low rate of AEs associated with treatment. Treatment with NASHA is an effective and safe single-injection procedure, which can be beneficial in the clinical management of knee OA.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 112 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 18%
Student > Master 16 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Other 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 32 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 39 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 19 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,416,577
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews
#33
of 192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,414
of 339,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 192 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 339,234 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 80% of its contemporaries.
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. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.