↓ Skip to main content

What Sport Activity Levels Are Achieved in Patients After Resection and Endoprosthetic Reconstruction for a Proximal Femur Bone Sarcoma?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, March 2016
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

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
Title
What Sport Activity Levels Are Achieved in Patients After Resection and Endoprosthetic Reconstruction for a Proximal Femur Bone Sarcoma?
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-4790-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gerhard M. Hobusch, Jakob Bollmann, Stephan E. Puchner, Nikolaus W. Lang, Jochen G. Hofstaetter, Philipp T. Funovics, Reinhard Windhager

Abstract

Limited information is available about sports activities of survivors after resection and reconstruction of primary malignant bone tumors with megaprostheses. Because patients often ask what activities are possible after treatment, objective knowledge about sports activities is needed to help assess the risks of sports participation and to help guide patients' expectations. The aims of this study were to evaluate (1) what proportion of patients with proximal-femoral megaprostheses placed as part of tumor reconstructions can perform sports; (2) what activity levels they achieved; and (3) whether sports activity levels are associated with an increased likelihood of revision. This retrospective study considered all 27 living patients in our institutional tumor registry with enduring proximal-femoral reconstructions performed more than 5 years ago who were between the ages of 11 and 49 years at the time of the reconstruction; seven were lost to followup and one was excluded because of paraplegia as a result of a car accident and another because of senile dementia; another two were excluded from statistics because of growing prostheses and skeletal immaturity at the time of followup, leaving 16 (11 male, five female) for analysis. Their mean age was 26 ± 12 years (range, 11-49 years) at surgery, and the mean followup was 18 ± 7 years (range, 5-27 years). Types of sports, frequency per week, duration of each sports session as well as the UCLA and modified Weighted Activity Score were assessed retrospectively by an independent assessor a median of 18 years (range, 5.3-27 years) after surgery. Patients recalled that preoperatively 14 were practicing sports 5 (± 4) hours/week. At followup, 11 of the patients were practicing one or more sports activities 2 (± 3) hours/week on a regular basis. The preoperative UCLA and modified Weighted Activity Score levels of 9 and 6 fell to levels of 6 (p = 0.005) and 3 (p = 0.025), respectively, at followup. With the numbers of patients available for study, we could not determine that prosthetic failures were associated with sport activity levels. Patients who survive primary malignant bone tumors in the proximal femur reconstructed by megaprostheses are able to perform some sports activities. The estimates of activity levels made in this study probably are best-case estimates, given that some patients were lost to followup; patients unaccounted for might not be doing as well as those represented here. Also, the degree to which sports participation influences implant durability remains, for the most part, unanswered; studies with more patients and longer followup will be needed to determine to what degree prosthesis survivorship relates to sporting activity levels. Most patients perform low-impact sports and at a lower level than they had preoperatively. Because this is a preliminary study of a select group of patients, further information is necessary to weight the benefits of higher sports activity levels against potential risks. If this can be confirmed in a larger number of patients, the information may guide surgeons in their discussion with patients preoperatively and give them some objective assessment of what to expect regarding sports activities. Level IV, therapeutic study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 26 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Sports and Recreations 9 9%
Psychology 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 30 31%
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 08 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,913,296
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#4,600
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,676
of 315,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#69
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 315,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.