↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of splinting, splinting plus local steroid injection and open carpal tunnel release outcomes in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Rheumatology International, July 2006
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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of splinting, splinting plus local steroid injection and open carpal tunnel release outcomes in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome
Published in
Rheumatology International, July 2006
DOI 10.1007/s00296-006-0163-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Halil Ucan, Ilker Yagci, Lale Yilmaz, Fırat Yagmurlu, Dilek Keskin, Hatice Bodur

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the short- and long-term efficacies of splinting (S), splinting plus local steroid injection (SLSI), and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) in mild or moderate idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Patients with mild or moderate idiopathic CTS who experienced symptoms for over 6 months were included in the study. The patients were evaluated for the baseline and the third and sixth month scores after treatment. Follow-up criteria were ENMG parameters, Boston Questionnaire, and patient satisfaction. Fifty-seven hands completed the study. Twenty-three hands had been splinted for 3 months. Twenty-three hands were given a single steroid injection and splinted for 3 months, and 11 hands were operated. In the first 3 months, all treatment methods provided significant improvements in both clinical and EMG parameters in which OCTR had better outcomes on median sensorial nerve velocity at palm wrist segment. In the second 3 months, while the clinical and EMG parameters began to deteriorate in S and SLSI group, OCTR group continued to improve, and BQ functional capacity score of OCTR group was statistically better than that in conservative methods (P = 0.03). S and SLSI treatments improved clinical and EMG parameters comparable to OCTR in short term. However, these beneficial effects were transient in the sixth month follow-up and OCTR was superior to conservative treatments.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Other 5 8%
Other 17 27%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 12 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 20 November 2013.
All research outputs
#3,515,537
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Rheumatology International
#269
of 2,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,024
of 65,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Rheumatology International
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,175 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 65,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 7 of them.