↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of facet joint degeneration in firefighters and hospital office workers

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 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
Comparison of facet joint degeneration in firefighters and hospital office workers
Published in
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40557-017-0180-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dong Hyun Kim, Yon Soo An, Hyung Doo Kim, Kyoung Sook Jeong, Yeon-Soon Ahn, Kun-Hyung Kim, Youngki Kim, Han-Soo Song, Chul-Gab Lee, Young-Jun Kwon, Jin-Ha Yoon

Abstract

There are few published studies on the relationship between occupational lumbar load and facet joint degeneration (FJD). This cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the effect of physical lumbar load on FJD by comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of firefighters (FFs) and hospital office workers (HOWs). We randomly sampled 341 male FFs and 80 male HOWs by age stratification. A questionnaire and clinical examination, including MRI of the lumbar spine (T12-S1), were conducted. FJD was diagnosed and graded by using the classification of Pathria et al., and reclassified into two groups as follows: no FJD (grade 0) and FJD (grades 1, 2, and 3). The prevalence of FJD was analyzed according to occupational group. The prevalence of FJD ranged from 31% (L1-L2) to 75% (L4-L5) in the FFs, and from 18% (L1-L2) to 69% (L4-L5) in the HOWs. After adjustment for age, body mass index, and frequency of physical exercise, the adjusted odds ratios (OR) for FJD in the FFs were significantly higher than those in the HOWs at all lumbar spinal levels, except for L3-L4 (L1-L2: OR, 2.644; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.317-5.310; L2-L3: OR, 2.285; 95% CI, 1.304-4.006; L4-L5: OR, 1.918; 95% CI, 1.037-3.544; L5-S1: OR, 1.811; 95% CI, 1.031-3.181). This study shows that FFs exhibit a greater likelihood of having FJD than HOWs after controlling for other risk factors of FJD. This suggests that the physical occupational demands of FFs affect their risk of developing FJD.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 %
Student > Master 11 30%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 10 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 19%
Sports and Recreations 3 8%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 8 22%

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 22 May 2020.
All research outputs
#10,044,605
of 17,786,057 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
#64
of 157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,889
of 276,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,786,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 157 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 276,247 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