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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Prying reduction with mosquito forceps versus limited open reduction for irreducible distal radius‐ulna fractures in older children: a retrospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, February 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-021-04024-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qiang Huang, Fei Su, Zhi Meng Wang, Han Zhong Xue, Liang Sun, Teng Ma, Qian Wang, Yao Lu, Ming Li, Cheng Ren, Cong Ming Zhang, Kun Zhang, Zhong Li |
| Abstract |
There are disputes about which reduction technique should be adopted in treatment of distal radius-ulna fractures in older children who failed to achieve manual reduction. This study compared clinical effects between prying reduction with mosquito forceps (PRMF) and limited open reduction (LOR) of treating irreducible distal radius-ulna fractures in older children. One hundred ten children with irreducible distal radius-ulna fractures were selected from January 2015 to December 2017 in Xi'an Hong Hui hospital. Retrospective analysis was performed. According to different reduction techniques, these children were divided into PRMF group (59 cases) and LOR group (51 cases). All children were treated with percutaneous Kirschner wire fixation and external fixation with plaster. Operation indexes, complications and wrist joint functions were compared between the two groups. Operation time of PRMF group was shorter than that of LOR group (P < 0.05). Incision length in PRMF group was less than that in LOR group (P < 0.05). Bleeding volume of PRMF group was less than that of LOR group (P < 0.05). Incidence of complications in PRMF group was lower than that in LOR group. Compared with limited open reduction, it has better clinical effects of prying reduction with mosquito forceps in treatment of irreducible distal radius-ulna fractures in older children. This technique has the advantages of simple operation, less trauma, less bleeding and fewer complications, which is worthy of clinical promotion. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Researcher | 1 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 70% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 70% |
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 07 February 2021.
All research outputs
#18,785,596
of 23,278,709 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3,197
of 4,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#379,180
of 505,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#70
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,278,709 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,131 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 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 505,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.