↓ Skip to main content

Divergent dislocation of the carpometacarpal joints: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Divergent dislocation of the carpometacarpal joints: a case report
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13256-018-1695-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Redouane Hani, Idriss Jeddi, Mohamed Saleh Berrada

Abstract

Divergent carpometacarpal joint dislocations of the fingers are very rare. Due to severe swelling and overlapping of bones on a radiograph of the wrist and hand, dislocations are missed. The purpose of this clinical case report is to highlight this unusual injury to avoid missing diagnosis. We report a case of a 24-year-old Moroccan man, an athlete, who presented divergent carpometacarpal joint fracture-dislocations of the ulnar four fingers after a fall during a national cycling competition. Radiographs showed divergent dislocation and associated fractures. He underwent open reduction and fixation with percutaneous Kirschner wires followed by 6 weeks of immobilization. Active physiotherapy was started and the results were satisfactory after a 2-year follow-up. Divergent carpometacarpal joint dislocations of the fingers are exceptional; their diagnosis is sometimes difficult and may go unnoticed especially in a patient with polytrauma. The functional prognosis depends on the precocity of diagnosis and the quality of the reduction and rehabilitation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Unknown 8 57%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 21%
Sports and Recreations 2 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Unknown 8 57%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,416,163
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,121
of 3,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,512
of 329,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#26
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,962 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 329,367 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.