↓ Skip to main content

Hip arthroscopy: evolution, current practice and future developments

Overview of attention for article published in International Orthopaedics, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Hip arthroscopy: evolution, current practice and future developments
Published in
International Orthopaedics, February 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00264-011-1459-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emmet J. Griffiths, Vikas Khanduja

Abstract

Arthroscopic examination and treatment is an ever-increasing part of modern orthopaedic practice in this age of minimally invasive surgery. Arthroscopic procedures have been widespread in surgery of the knee and the shoulder for many years; however, the hip until relatively recently, has been largely neglected. Even now hip arthroscopy is not widely available; this may be due to the complexity of the procedure, the requirement of specialist equipment and a reportedly long learning curve. On the other hand, it has gone through a period of rapid growth over the last decade and is being performed in large numbers routinely in some centres around the world. Hip arthroscopy now provides excellent visualisation of not only the articular surfaces of the hip joint but also of the peritrochanteric or extra-articular space around the hip. Pathology of both the femoral head and the acetabulum along with the soft tissues of the hip, namely the ligamentum teres, the acetabular labrum, the synovial folds and synovium, is readily diagnosed. Modern techniques provide therapeutic options for a myriad of conditions and allow modulation of pathological processes early. Additionally hip arthroscopy is a relatively safe procedure with few complications and contraindications. However, the key to good outcomes is in the careful selection of patients and meticulous surgical technique. The aim of this review is to bring the reader up to date with an overview of the evolution of arthroscopy of the hip, review the current practice and explore possible future developments.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 76 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 17%
Other 9 12%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Student > Master 7 9%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Engineering 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 22 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 July 2022.
All research outputs
#7,522,368
of 22,957,478 outputs
Outputs from International Orthopaedics
#429
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,670
of 156,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Orthopaedics
#9
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,957,478 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 156,095 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.