↓ Skip to main content

Reliability of clinically relevant 3D foot bone angles from quantitative computed tomography

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Reliability of clinically relevant 3D foot bone angles from quantitative computed tomography
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1757-1146-6-38
Pubmed ID
Authors

David J Gutekunst, Lu Liu, Tao Ju, Fred W Prior, David R Sinacore

Abstract

Surgical treatment and clinical management of foot pathology requires accurate, reliable assessment of foot deformities. Foot and ankle deformities are multi-planar and therefore difficult to quantify by standard radiographs. Three-dimensional (3D) imaging modalities have been used to define bone orientations using inertial axes based on bone shape, but these inertial axes can fail to mimic established bone angles used in orthopaedics and clinical biomechanics. To provide improved clinical relevance of 3D bone angles, we developed techniques to define bone axes using landmarks on quantitative computed tomography (QCT) bone surface meshes. We aimed to assess measurement precision of landmark-based, 3D bone-to-bone orientations of hind foot and lesser tarsal bones for expert raters and a template-based automated method.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 21%
Student > Master 9 19%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 29%
Engineering 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 16 33%