↓ Skip to main content

Parotidectomy using the Harmonic scalpel: ten years of experience at a rural academic health center

Overview of attention for article published in Head & Face Medicine, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Parotidectomy using the Harmonic scalpel: ten years of experience at a rural academic health center
Published in
Head & Face Medicine, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13005-017-0141-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc A. Polacco, Andrew M. Pintea, Benoit J. Gosselin, Joseph A. Paydarfar

Abstract

Parotidectomy is one of the most commonly performed procedures by otorhinolaryngologists. Traditionally dissection is performed with a combination of a steel scalpel and bipolar cautery; however, starting in the early 2000s, the Harmonic scalpel has provided an alternative method for dissection and hemostasis. The purpose of this study is to compare operative time, blood loss, complications, and cost between the Harmonic scalpel and steel scalpel plus bipolar cautery for superficial and total parotidectomy. Retrospective cohort of patients who underwent superficial or total parotidectomy with the Harmonic or cold steel between 2000 and 2015. Across 255 patients, comparison between operative time, blood loss, complications, and cost was performed. Superficial parotidectomy was performed on 120 patients with the Harmonic and 54 with steel scalpel. Total parotidectomy was performed on 59 patients using the Harmonic and 22 patients with cold steel. For superficial parotidectomy, the Harmonic reduced operative time (216 ± 42 vs. 234 ± 54 min, p = 0.03) and decreased blood loss (28 ± 19 vs. 76 ± 52 mls, p < 0.05). With total parotidectomy the Harmonic decreased operative time (240 ± 42 vs. 288 ± 78 min, p = 0.01) and reduced blood loss (38 ± 21 mls vs. 85 ± 55 mls, p < 0.05). There were no differences in complication rates between groups. Harmonic use was associated with surgical cost reduction secondary to reduced operative times. The Harmonic scalpel decreases blood loss and operating time for superficial and total parotidectomy. Shorter operative times may decrease the overall cost of parotidectomy.

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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 6 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 33%
Unspecified 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 7 33%
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 13 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,420,242
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Head & Face Medicine
#311
of 334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,643
of 310,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Head & Face Medicine
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 334 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 310,860 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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.