↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of clinical- and patient-reported outcomes of the cemented ATTUNE and PFC sigma fixed bearing cruciate sacrificing knee systems in patients who underwent total knee replacement with both…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
A comparison of clinical- and patient-reported outcomes of the cemented ATTUNE and PFC sigma fixed bearing cruciate sacrificing knee systems in patients who underwent total knee replacement with both prostheses in opposite knees
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13018-018-0757-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian W. Carey, James Harty

Abstract

The ATTUNE Knee by DePuy Synthes was introduced in 2013. It is designed to provide better range of motion and address patient-reported instability. The PFC Sigma Knee, an earlier prosthesis by DePuy Synthes, is a common knee replacement with a strong clinical track record. Our aim is to compare the outcomes after primary total knee replacement for end-stage knee osteoarthritis of the PFC and ATTUNE knee systems in 21 patients who each have prosthesis in opposite knees using WOMAC, Oxford Knee and SF-12 scores and evaluation of range of motion. A review was carried out on 21 patients who underwent primary total knee replacement with both the ATTUNE and PFC knee systems. These were staged operations performed in the same institution and by the same surgeon. All cases were followed up for a minimum of 6 months. WOMAC, Oxford Knee and SF-12 scores, as well as knee range of motion were recorded preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. There was a significant difference in pre- to 6-month post-operative outcomes in PFC and ATTUNE groups with regard to improvement in range of motion (10° ± 8 and 13° ± 11, respectively). There was also a significant improvement in WOMAC scores (PFC group) and Oxford Knee Scores (ATTUNE group) (8.9 ± 7.7 and 12.1 ± 8.4, respectively). There was a significant improvement in SF-12 Score in both groups (10.1 ± 9.3 for PFC and 15.8 ± 13.3 for ATTUNE). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in scoring systems at 6 months was reached by 6 patients in the PFC group and 12 in the ATTUNE group. A significant difference was demonstrated in clinical outcome at 6 months postoperatively between PFC and ATTUNE knee systems in patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty with both prostheses. Superior results were recorded for the ATTUNE knee system.

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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 16%
Student > Postgraduate 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 42%
Engineering 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 25 July 2021.
All research outputs
#3,158,367
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#84
of 1,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,535
of 333,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#2
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,403 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 333,794 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.