↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of fixed and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty in terms of patellofemoral pain and function: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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 fixed and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty in terms of patellofemoral pain and function: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1635-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

P. Z. Feczko, L. M. Jutten, M. J. van Steyn, P. Deckers, P. J. Emans, J. J. Arts

Abstract

Despite growing evidence in the literature, there is still a lack of consensus regarding the use of the mobile-bearing (MB) design total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In a prospective, comparative, randomised, single centre trial, 106 patients with end-stage osteoarthritis of the knee were randomised to either an MB or fixed-bearing (FB) group to receive posterior stabilised (PS)-TKA using a standard medial parapatellar approach and patellar resurfacing with follow-up (FU) for 5 years. The primary outcome was anterior knee pain (AKP) during the chair rise test and the stair climb test 5 years after surgery. The secondary outcome was the ability to rise from a chair and to climb stairs, range of motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS), RAND-36 scores and radiological analysis of the patellar tilt. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups at 5 years FU in terms of median AKP during the chair rise test and the stair climb test (p = 0.5 and p = 0.8, respectively). There was no significant difference in any of the other secondary outcome parameters between the groups at 5 years FU. A mobile-bearing TKA does not decrease AKP compared to fixed bearings. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02892838 . II.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Researcher 5 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 5%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 45 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Psychology 2 2%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 44 51%
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 18 September 2017.
All research outputs
#20,444,703
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3,666
of 4,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,956
of 315,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#80
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 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 4,091 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. 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 315,267 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 92 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.