| Title |
Osteosynthesis versus endoprosthesis for the treatment of femoral neck fracture in Asian elderly patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-016-1123-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joon Soon Kang, Yoon Sang Jeon, Chi Hoon Ahn, Tae Hoon Roh |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results between osteosynthesis and endoprosthesis for femoral neck fractures in asian elderly patients, and to analysis the factors that may affect the failure of osteosynthesis. A retrospective review of 382 hips over 65-year old with femoral neck fracture was done. Within non-displaced fracture group, 81 cases (56.6 %) underwent internal fixation (IF) and with 62 cases (43.3 %) having bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BPHA). As for displaced fracture group, 60 cases (25.1 %) underwent internal fixation (IF) with 179 cases (74.8 %) having BPHA. Average follow-up period for the patients was 36.8 months. Analysis was conducted on complications depending on fracture types and osteoporosis, and clinical evaluation was done on gait capability by using Koval walking ability. In non-displaced group, BPHA group showed statistically significant lower percentage of complications compared to IF group, but re-operation rate and the degradations of Koval score were no significant differences. In displaced group, complication, re-operation rate and the degradations of Koval score of BPHA group were statistically better than those of IF group. Association between osteoporosis and non-union is no statistically significant. Endoprosthetic replacement could be a primary option for displaced femoral neck fracture in elderly asian patients. The choice of surgical treatment methods of non-displaced fracture in elderly asian patients should be determined carefully considering the age and the presence of osteoporosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 18% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#18,616,159
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3,041
of 4,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,832
of 359,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#70
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,185 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 359,224 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.