↓ Skip to main content

Association of wrist and forearm range of motion measures with self-reported functional scores amongst patients with distal radius fractures: a longitudinal study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Association of wrist and forearm range of motion measures with self-reported functional scores amongst patients with distal radius fractures: a longitudinal study
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12891-018-2065-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zixian Yang, Peggy Poh Hoon Lim, Sing Hwee Teo, Huiwen Chen, Huaying Qiu, Yong Hao Pua

Abstract

Patients with distal radius fractures (DRF) often have limited range-of-motion (ROM) in multiple planes of movement. No studies have comprehensively examined the impact of various ROM limitations on physical function. We performed a multi-center, longitudinal study of 138 patients with conservatively managed DRF. ROM measures were taken at initial evaluation, and at 4 and 8 weeks later. Self-reported physical function was indexed by the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH). Wrist extension, active thumb opposition and a full composite grip were amongst the strongest ROM measures associated with functional scores over time. However, wrist radial deviation and forearm pronation were non-significantly associated with functional scores. Given that ROM is potentially modifiable, the identification of important ROM measures associated with QuickDASH scores can potentially facilitate patient education and refine interventions to optimize functional recovery. Well-designed randomized intervention studies are however needed to confirm these association findings.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Student > Master 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Researcher 3 4%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 42 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Psychology 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 46 58%
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 16 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,512,170
of 23,053,169 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,492
of 4,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,408
of 325,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#36
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,169 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,098 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 325,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.