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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in patients younger than 50 years: a retrospective analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13018-017-0579-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Melissa D. Gaillard, Thomas P. Gross |
| Abstract |
The Nordic registry reports patients under 50 years old with total hip replacements realize only 83% 10-year implant survivorship. These results do not meet the 95% 10-year survivorship guideline posed by the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in 2014. The purpose of this study is threefold: First, we evaluate if metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty meets these high standards in younger patients. Next, we compare outcomes between age groups to determine if younger patients are at higher risk for revision or complication. Lastly, we assess how outcomes between sexes changed over time. From January 2001 to August 2013, a single surgeon performed 1285 metal-on-metal hip resurfacings in patients younger than 50 years old. We compared these to an older cohort matched by sex and BMI. Kaplan-Meier implant survivorship was 96.5% at 10 years and 96.3% at 12 years; this did not differ from implant survivorship for older patients. Implant survivorship at 12 years was 98 and 93% for younger men and women, respectively; survivorship for women improved from 93 to 97% by using exclusively Biomet implants. There were four (0.3%) adverse wear-related failures, with no instances of wear or problematic ion levels since 2009. Activity scores improved from 5.4 ± 2.3 preoperatively to 7.6 ± 1.9 postoperatively (p < 0.0001), with 43% of patients reporting a UCLA activity score of 9 or 10. Hip resurfacing exceeds the stricter 2014 NICE survivorship criteria independently in men and women even when performed on patients under 50 years old. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Engineering | 4 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
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 11 June 2017.
All research outputs
#13,555,965
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#434
of 1,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,965
of 317,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#11
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,397 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 317,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.