↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Transzonular vitreous injection vs a single drop compounded topical pharmaceutical regimen after cataract surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#26 of 3,712)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Transzonular vitreous injection vs a single drop compounded topical pharmaceutical regimen after cataract surgery
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, July 2016
DOI 10.2147/opth.s112080
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bret L Fisher, Rick Potvin

Abstract

To compare the relative effectiveness of a Tri-Moxi-Vanc intraocular solution injected transzonularly into the vitreous with the topical formulation of Pred-Moxi-Ketor (given for the first week postoperatively) followed by Pred-Ketor (given for weeks 2-4 after surgery). This was a single-site, single-surgeon, prospective, randomized, subject-masked contralateral eye study with an active comparator and was approved by an appropriate ethics committee. Twenty-five subjects with uncomplicated cataract who were scheduled for cataract surgery were enrolled. If surgery was uneventful, subjects received either an injection in that eye or followed a minimum drop postoperative pharmaceutical regimen. The second eye surgery was performed with the opposite treatment. Subjects were followed for 1 month. Measures of interest were the changes in intraocular pressure (IOP) from baseline and the changes in corneal and macular thickness. Subjects were also asked to evaluate pain perception, visual quality, and overall satisfaction with surgery. They were also asked which regimen they preferred. IOP was not statistically significantly different between the groups (P=0.81); there was also no statistically significant difference in IOP over time (P=0.74). There was no statistically significant difference in central macular thickness at 1 week and 1 month between the groups (P=0.18). The central corneal thickness was significantly greater 1 day postoperatively relative to baseline, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups at any time point (P=0.92). The difference in reported pain was also not statistically significantly different between the groups (P=0.67). Satisfaction with surgery was similar for both groups, but significantly more subjects preferred the injection for overall experience (P<0.01). Cataract surgery completed with the two pharmaceutical regimens was similar in outcome. Significantly more subjects preferred the injection, presumably as a function of the greater convenience with no apparent difference in the therapeutic effect.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 17%
Student > Master 3 17%
Other 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 5 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 39%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 91. 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 26 August 2016.
All research outputs
#465,959
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#26
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,307
of 367,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#3
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 367,269 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.