↓ Skip to main content

Edrophonium Challenge Test for Blepharospasm

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Edrophonium Challenge Test for Blepharospasm
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2016.00226
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shinichi Matsumoto, Nagahisa Murakami, Hidetaka Koizumi, Masatoshi Takahashi, Yuishin Izumi, Ryuji Kaji

Abstract

Blepharospasm is typically diagnosed by excluding any secondary diseases and neuropsychiatric disorders, as specific tests for blepharospasm are currently unavailable. Since anticholinergic agents are used to improve the symptoms of dystonia, we hypothesized that edrophonium chloride, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, may make the symptoms of dystonia more apparent. Therefore, we examined whether an edrophonium challenge test would be useful for diagnosing blepharospasm. We studied 10 patients with blepharospasm and 10 with hemifacial spasms (as disease controls). We administered edrophonium and saline in this double-blind study. Before and after the injection, we recorded the clinical signs using a video camera to assess the objective symptoms every 2 min. Ten minutes after the isotonic sodium chloride and edrophonium injections, the patients evaluated their subjective signs using a visual analog scale (VAS). The objective signs on the video recordings were scored by specialists who were blind to the treatment. The subjective and objective signs of the patients with blepharospasm were amplified by edrophonium. In contrast, the signs in patients with hemifacial spasms were not changed by the edrophonium challenge test. The edrophonium challenge test may be used to diagnose blepharospasm. The study was registered with a ICMJE recognized registry, the UMIN-CTR, with the number UMIN000022557.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 3 19%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 5 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Unknown 5 31%
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 06 June 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#10,137
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#311,269
of 355,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#163
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. 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 355,635 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 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.