↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Identifying the variables associated with pain during transrectal ultrasonography of the prostate

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Identifying the variables associated with pain during transrectal ultrasonography of the prostate
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s83073
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chen-Pang Hou, Yu-Hsiang Lin, Meng-Chiao Hsieh, Chien-Lun Chen, Phei-Lang Chang, Ying-Chen Huang, Ke-Hung Tsui

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to prospectively investigate the degree of pain experienced by the patients receiving transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) of the prostate by applying a visual analog scale. We also identified the clinical parameters influencing pain during the TRUS examination. Records were obtained from a prospective database for male patients who received TRUS of prostate in the outpatient department of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, from January 2014 to June 2014. The patients underwent a detailed physical examination and medical history review. Immediately after the TRUS examination, the patients completed questionnaires based on a ten-point visual analog pain scale. The variables of interest were age, body mass index, prostate volume, prostate sagittal length, prostate-specific antigen, previous TRUS experience, external hemorrhoids, anal surgical history, prostate calcification, and image artifact caused by stool in the rectum. All variables were correlated to the visual analog scale by applying multivariate regression analysis. By using linear regression analysis, we identified the independent factors that affected the pain score during the TRUS examination. The patients who received the examination for the first time or had longer prostate sagittal lengths, external hemorrhoids, anal surgical history, or stool stored in the rectum experienced more pain during the TRUS examination. Furthermore, the pain was reduced when we provided the patients with a detailed explanation before the procedure and allowed them to observe the real-time images during the examination. Although a TRUS examination is uncomfortable for patients, after having identified the factors affecting pain, physicians can assist patients in reducing pain during the procedure, thus providing higher quality examinations.

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 %
Professor > Associate Professor 3 25%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Researcher 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Unknown 5 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 25%
Chemistry 1 8%
Psychology 1 8%
Unknown 7 58%
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 25 August 2015.
All research outputs
#15,344,095
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#961
of 1,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,510
of 264,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#38
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,598 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 264,261 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.