↓ Skip to main content

Current concepts in joint pain in knee osteoarthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Der Schmerz, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#5 of 400)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
72 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
Title
Current concepts in joint pain in knee osteoarthritis
Published in
Der Schmerz, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00482-018-0275-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. Mills, M. Hübscher, H. O’Leary, N. Moloney

Abstract

Joint pain attributable to osteoarthritis (OA) is complex and influenced by a myriad of factors beyond local joint pathology. Current practice continues to predominantly adopt a biomedical approach to OA despite emerging evidence of the importance of a more holistic approach. This paper will summarise evidence for the presence of multidimensional pain profiles in knee joint pain and the presence of subgroups characterized by systemic features such as psychological distress, high comorbidity load or sensitisation of the nervous system. These factors have the potential to influence patient outcomes making them relevant for clinicians and highlighting the necessity of a broader multifactorial approach to assessment and treatment. This review describes the current state of the evidence for treatments of people with knee OA-related pain, including those receiving strong recommendations from current clinical guidelines, namely exercise, weight loss, self-management advice and pharmacological approaches. Other pain-modulating treatment options are emerging such as sleep and psychological interventions, pain education and multisensory retraining. The evidence and rationale for these newer therapeutic approaches is discussed. Finally, this review will highlight some of the limitations of current international guidelines for the management of OA and make recommendations for future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 72 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 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 13%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Lecturer 7 5%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 54 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 16%
Sports and Recreations 8 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 60 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 29 July 2021.
All research outputs
#886,285
of 24,975,223 outputs
Outputs from Der Schmerz
#5
of 400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,150
of 336,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Der Schmerz
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,975,223 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 400 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 336,834 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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