↓ Skip to main content

Method for the location of primary wear scars from retrieved metal on metal hip replacements

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Method for the location of primary wear scars from retrieved metal on metal hip replacements
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0622-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Garima Govind, Johann Henckel, Harry Hothi, Shiraz Sabah, John Skinner, Alister Hart

Abstract

Retrieved metal-on-metal acetabular cups are valuable resources in investigating the wear behaviour of failed hip implants, but adequate methods to do so are lacking. To further contribute to addressing this issue, we developed a method to detect the in vivo location of the primary wear scar of an explanted cup. We proposed a new method in which thirteen patients with failed metal hip resurfacings were recruited, and their acetabular components retrieved. A 3D wear map was generated and the precise location of the primary wear scar in each cup was identified using a coordinate measuring machine. This wear scar location was noted in relation to the features on the acetabular cup. Having identified the location of the wear scar, this 3D positional map was co-registered to the implant on the patient's pelvic 3D CT scan. Using our proposed technique, we were able to demonstrate that the in vivo position of the primary wear scar in explanted metal acetabular cups can be variable. This method has utilised existing techniques to better understand the three-dimensional properties of wear behaviour, and may be a method which can be used in further studies to investigate variables that affect the position of the primary wear scar.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 23%
Researcher 4 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 8 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 23%
Mathematics 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 4 18%
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 07 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,750,413
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,987
of 4,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,812
of 263,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#34
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,043 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 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 263,149 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.