↓ Skip to main content

Case-Match Controlled Comparison of Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis and Intramedullary Nailing for the Stabilization of Humeral Shaft Fractures

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of orthopaedic trauma, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Case-Match Controlled Comparison of Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis and Intramedullary Nailing for the Stabilization of Humeral Shaft Fractures
Published in
Journal of orthopaedic trauma, November 2016
DOI 10.1097/bot.0000000000000643
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gareth Davies, Gerald Yeo, Mahendrakumar Meta, David Miller, Erik Hohmann, Kevin Tetsworth

Abstract

To compare the risk of major complications after either minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) or intramedullary nailing (IMN) of humeral shaft fractures. Retrospective, case-match controlled study. A major metropolitan tertiary referral trauma center in Australia. Thirty patients with fractures of the humeral shaft. Either MIPO or IMN were performed on 15 patients each with traumatic humeral shaft fractures. The cumulative risk of 3 major complications associated with these procedures: nonunion, infection, and iatrogenic radial nerve injury. An overall major complication rate of 53% was observed in the patients treated with IMN; one complication (7%) was identified in those managed with humeral MIPO, a nonunion. Complications after IMN included 4 patients (27%) with nonunion, 3 patients (20%) with iatrogenic radial nerve injuries, and 1 patient (7%) with a wound infection. Statistical analysis revealed a significant between-group difference (P = 0.01) in the cumulative rate of major complications. When each of these complications was considered independently, no statistically significant difference was demonstrated. This study suggests that humeral MIPO results in a significantly lower pooled major complication rate than that of IMN, and it should therefore be considered an attractive alternative to IMN in those patients requiring surgical stabilization of a traumatic humeral shaft fracture. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 18%
Other 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Lecturer 4 8%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 43%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 18 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 October 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of orthopaedic trauma
#2,282
of 3,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,759
of 317,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of orthopaedic trauma
#53
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,042 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 317,805 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.