↓ Skip to main content

Update on anterior ankle impingement

Overview of attention for article published in Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Update on anterior ankle impingement
Published in
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, March 2012
DOI 10.1007/s12178-012-9117-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanawat Vaseenon, Annunziato Amendola

Abstract

Anterior ankle impingement results from an impingement of the ankle joint by a soft tissue or osteophyte formation at the anterior aspect of the distal tibia and talar neck. It often occurs secondary to direct trauma (impaction force) or repetitive ankle dorsiflexion (repetitive impaction and traction force). Chronic ankle pain, swelling, and limitation of ankle dorsiflexion are common complaints. Imaging is valuable for diagnosis of the bony impingement but not for the soft tissue impingement, which is based on clinical findings. MR imaging and MR arthrography are helpful in doubtful diagnoses and the identification of associated injuries. Recommended methods for initial management include rest, physical therapy, and shoe modification. If nonoperative treatment fails, arthroscopic bony or soft tissue debridement both offer significant symptomatic relief with long-term positive outcomes in cases that have no significant arthritic change, associated ligament laxity, and chondral lesion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 102 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 19%
Student > Master 17 16%
Other 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 23 22%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 42%
Sports and Recreations 15 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Psychology 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 <1%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 22 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 22 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,895,922
of 23,874,480 outputs
Outputs from Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
#58
of 506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,903
of 158,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,874,480 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 158,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them