| Title |
Current Concepts and Future Directions of Minimally Invasive Treatment for Knee Pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Rheumatology Reports, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11926-018-0765-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daryl T. Goldman, Rachel Piechowiak, Daniel Nissman, Sandeep Bagla, Ari Isaacson |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this paper is to review the percutaneous interventions available for the treatment of osteoarthrosis of the knee that address pain and prolong the time to arthroplasty. Corticosteroid injection and viscosupplementation have been the most studied, but there is still no consensus about their value. Thermal nerve ablation, including both radiofrequency ablation and cryoneurolysis, is a promising new modality of therapy that may increase in clinical use given current data showing favorable outcomes. Of the future therapies that are currently under investigation, synovial embolization via the geniculate arteries represents an exciting new approach that may soon be available clinically. There are various percutaneous interventions available for the treatment of osteoarthrosis of the knee that address pain and prolong the time to arthroplasty. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 57% |
| Mexico | 2 | 10% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Georgia | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Argentina | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 48% |
| Members of the public | 9 | 43% |
| Scientists | 1 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 128 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 11% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 26 | 20% |
| Unknown | 43 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 48 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 03 August 2018.
All research outputs
#2,273,883
of 25,145,981 outputs
Outputs from Current Rheumatology Reports
#78
of 747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,026
of 335,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Rheumatology Reports
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,145,981 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 747 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 335,945 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.