↓ Skip to main content

Prosthesis design and placement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 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
Prosthesis design and placement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13018-015-0244-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

David C Ackland, Minoo Patel, David Knox

Abstract

The management of irreparable rotator cuff tears associated with osteoarthritis of the glenohumeral joint has long been challenging. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) was designed to provide pain relief and improve shoulder function in patients with severe rotator cuff tear arthropathy. While this procedure has been known to reduce pain, improve strength and increase range of motion in shoulder elevation, scapular notching, rotation deficiency, early implant loosening and dislocation have attributed to complication rates as high as 62 %. Patient selection, surgical approach and post-operative management are factors vital to successful outcome of RSA, with implant design and component positioning having a significant influence on the ability of the shoulder muscles to elevate, axially rotate and stabilise the humerus. Clinical and biomechanical studies have revealed that component design and placement affects the location of the joint centre of rotation and therefore the force-generating capacity of the muscles and overall joint mobility and stability. Furthermore, surgical technique has also been shown to have an important influence on clinical outcome of RSA, as it can affect intra-operative joint exposure as well as post-operative muscle function. This review discusses the behaviour of the shoulder after RSA and the influence of implant design, component positioning and surgical technique on post-operative joint function and clinical outcome.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 165 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 14%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Researcher 16 10%
Other 15 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 8%
Other 39 23%
Unknown 38 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 39%
Engineering 28 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 53 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 August 2015.
All research outputs
#11,553,575
of 20,568,640 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#320
of 1,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,203
of 243,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,568,640 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,238 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 243,028 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 56% 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