| Title |
Intraarticular cortisone injection for osteoarthritis of the hip. Is it effective? Is it safe?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, May 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12178-008-9029-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David W. Kruse |
| Abstract |
Osteoarthritis of the hip is a significant source of morbidity in the elderly. Treatment guidelines are available for the management of hip osteoarthritis, but these do not address the application of intraarticular corticosteroid injection. The intraarticular injection of corticosteroid is used in the management of other large joint osteoarthritic diseases and is well studied in the knee, however, this data cannot be used to make sound clinical decisions regarding its use for hip osteoarthritis. There are also concerns regarding the safety of this modality. Review of the published literature reveals that there are eight trials examining the efficacy of intraarticular corticosteroid injection for hip osteoarthritis and of these only four are randomized controlled trials. In general, the available literature demonstrates a short-term reduction of pain with corticosteroid injection and is indicated for patients refractory to non-pharmacologic or analgesic and NSAID therapy. The use of radiologic-guidance is recommended and, with proper sterile technique, the risk of adverse outcomes is very low. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to further examine the efficacy and safety of intraarticular corticosteroid injection for hip osteoarthritis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 18 | 23% |
| Unknown | 13 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 53% |
| Engineering | 7 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 14 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,355,005
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
#215
of 539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,913
of 97,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 539 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 97,650 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.