↓ Skip to main content

Echinacea/sage or chlorhexidine/lidocaine for treating acute sore throats: a randomized double-blind trial

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Medical Research, January 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 459)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Echinacea/sage or chlorhexidine/lidocaine for treating acute sore throats: a randomized double-blind trial
Published in
European Journal of Medical Research, January 2009
DOI 10.1186/2047-783x-14-9-406
Pubmed ID
Authors

A Schapowal, D Berger, P Klein, A Suter

Abstract

The aim of this trial was to assess the relative efficacy of a sage/echinacea spray and a chlorhexidine/lidocaine spray in the treatment of acute sore throats. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy controlled trial carried out in eleven general practices in Switzerland. A total of 154 patients (133 analyzed in per protocol collective) at least 12 years old with acute sore throat present for not more than 72 hours prior to inclusion and with a throat score >/=6 participated in the study. They used either an echinacea/sage spray or a chlorhexidine/ lidocaine spray with two puffs every 2 hours, in a double-dummy blinded manner, up to 10 times daily until they were symptom-free, for a maximum of 5 days. The main outcome measures was the comparison of response rates during the first three days. A response was defined as a decrease of at least 50% of the total symptoms compared to baseline. The echinacea/sage treatment exhibited similar efficacy to the chlorhexidine/lidocaine treatment in reducing sore throat symptoms during the first 3 days (P(x<Y) = .5083). Response rates after 3 days were 63.8% in the echinacea/sage group and 57.8% in the chlorhexidine/lidocaine group. For all secondary parameters, such as time to becoming symptom free, throat pain, and global assessments of efficacy by the physician and patient, no difference between the two treatments was seen. They were both very well tolerated. An echinacea/sage preparation is as efficacious and well tolerated as a chlorhexidine/lidocaine spray in the treatment of acute sore throats.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Russia 1 1%
Egypt 1 1%
Unknown 65 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 27 39%
Student > Master 10 14%
Other 8 12%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 9 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 29 December 2020.
All research outputs
#522,764
of 19,852,973 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Medical Research
#8
of 459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,083
of 391,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Medical Research
#1
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,852,973 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 459 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 391,718 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 99% of its contemporaries.