| Title |
Kinematics of anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees in a Chinese population during stair ascent
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13018-016-0423-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chang Zhao, Chuangxin Lin, Wenhao Wang, Chun Zeng, Hang Fang, Jianying Pan, Daozhang Cai |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to measure the tibiofemoral kinematics of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficiency in a Chinese population and compare the kinematics with published data about a Caucasian population. Unilateral knees of 18 Chinese ACL-deficient (ACL-D) subjects were studied while subjects ascended stairs. Kinematic alteration was compared between ACL-D knees and contralateral ACL-intact (ACL-I) knees. The kinematic alteration of ACL deficiency was also compared between the Chinese population and published data about a Caucasian population. A statistical difference was found in the three-dimensional rotations between ACL-D and ACL-I knees. In the sagittal plane, ACL-I knees had a larger flexion angle than ACL-D knees during 40 to 50 % of the activity during stair ascent (P < 0.027) and throughout the gait cycle. A significant difference in rotational motion between ACL-D and ACL-I knees was also observed in the frontal plane during 40 to 60 % (P < 0.017) of the activity and in the transverse plane during 70 to 80 % (P < 0.028) of the activity. A greater tibial varus was demonstrated in the Chinese population while the published data revealed external tibial rotation and a statistical difference in translation in the Caucasian population. ACL-D knees show different kinematics than ACL-I knees in the Chinese population. ACL-I knees had a larger flexion angle than ACL-D knees in the middle stage of the activity during stair ascent. A significant difference in rotational motion between ACL-D and ACL-I knees was also observed in the frontal plane during the middle phase and in the transverse plane during the terminal phase of the activity. A greater tibial varus was demonstrated in the Caucasian population while the published data revealed external tibial rotation and a statistical difference in translation in the Caucasian population. |
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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 27 | 44% |
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 09 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,269,286
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#495
of 1,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,995
of 364,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#12
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 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 1,378 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 364,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.