↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Surveillance of antibiotic and analgesic use in the Oral Surgery Department of the University Dentistry Clinical Center of Kosovo

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Surveillance of antibiotic and analgesic use in the Oral Surgery Department of the University Dentistry Clinical Center of Kosovo
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, October 2015
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s87595
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shaip Krasniqi, Naim Haliti, Fehim Haliti, Ferit Koçani, Ali Gashi, Shefqet Mrasori, Valon Hyseni, Samir Bytyqi, Lumnije Krasniqi, Ardiana Murtezani

Abstract

Because Kosovo has no reliable information on antimicrobial and analgesic use in dental practice, the survey reported here evaluated the antibiotic and analgesic prescriptions in the Oral Surgery Department of the University Dentistry Clinical Center of Kosovo (UDCCK). The data of 2,442 registered patients for a 1-year period were screened and analyzed concerning antibiotic and analgesic use as per standards of rational prescription. Dentistry doctors prescribed antibiotics significantly more often than analgesics. Antibiotics were prescribed in 8.11% of all cases, while only 1.35% of total prescriptions were for analgesics. The total consumption of antibiotic drugs in the UDCCK was 4.53 Defined Daily Doses [DDD]/1,000 inhabitants/day, compared with only 0.216 DDD/1,000 inhabitants/day for analgesics. From a total number of 117 patients, 32 patients received combinations of two antibiotics. Pharmacotherapy analysis showed that the prescription rates of antibiotics and analgesics in the UDCCK are not rational in terms of the qualitative aspects of treatment. For the qualitative improvement of prescription of these drug groups, we recommend the implementation of treatment guidelines following rational standards.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 25%
Other 5 16%
Student > Master 5 16%
Lecturer 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 56%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Unknown 7 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#6,488,581
of 12,485,238 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#357
of 922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,872
of 248,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#18
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,485,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 922 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 248,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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 64% of its contemporaries.