↓ Skip to main content

Systematic review of ototoxic pre-surgical antiseptic preparations – what is the evidence?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Systematic review of ototoxic pre-surgical antiseptic preparations – what is the evidence?
Published in
Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40463-018-0265-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shubhi Singh, Brian Blakley

Abstract

There is uncertainty regarding the safety of surgical antiseptic preparations in the ear. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to assess the evidence regarding ototoxicity of surgical antiseptic preparations. A literature search was conducted using the PRISMA methods. Key words included "ototoxicity" "hearing loss", "antiseptic", "surgical preparation", "tympanoplasty", "vestibular dysfunction", "chlorhexidine", "iodine", "povidone", "ethanol", and "hydrogen peroxide" using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science. We included peer-reviewed papers that 1) objectively measured ototoxicity in humans or animals through hearing, vestibular function or histologic examination, 2) studied topically applied surgical antiseptic preparations, 3) were either in English or had an English abstract. We excluded papers that were 1) in vitro studies, 2) ear trauma studies, 3) studies of ototoxic ear drops intended for therapy, or 4) case reports. Studies included in the final review were screened using the PRISMA method. Current systematic review registration number pending: 83,675. Fifty-six papers were identified as using PRISMA criteria. After applying our exclusion criteria, 13 papers met overall study criteria. Of these, six papers reported ototoxicity of iodine based solutions, five papers reported ototoxicity of chlorhexidine and ethanol and two papers assessed hydrogen peroxide. All papers reviewed were animal studies. Iodine based solutions show least harm overall, while chlorhexidine and high concentrations of alcohol based solutions showed most harm. The evidence on hydrogen based solutions was inconclusive. The overall evidence for anyone antiseptic solution is weak. There is some evidence that iodine, chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide and alcohol based antiseptics have ototoxicity. Conclusive evidence for human ototoxicity from any solution is not strong.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 11 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 46%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 June 2019.
All research outputs
#8,440,124
of 15,339,977 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#74
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,406
of 278,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,339,977 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 307 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 278,258 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them