You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Waterjet drilling in porcine bone: The effect of the nozzle diameter and bone architecture on the hole dimensions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.06.012 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Steven den Dunnen, Lars Mulder, Gino M.M.J. Kerkhoffs, Jenny Dankelman, Gabrielle J.M. Tuijthof |
| Abstract |
Using waterjets instead of rigid drill bits for bone drilling can be beneficial due to the absence of thermal damage and a consequent sharp cut. Additionally, waterjet technology allows the development of flexible instruments that facilitate maneuvering through complex joint spaces. Controlling the drilling depth is of utmost importance to ensure clinical safety, but is challenging given the local variations in structural properties of the bone. The goal of this study was to deduce a descriptive mathematical equation able to predict the hole depth and diameter based on the local structural properties of the bone at given waterjet diameters. 210 holes were drilled in porcine femora and tali with waterjet diameters (Dnozzle) of 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6mm at a pressure of 700bar and a 5s jet time. Hole depths (Lhole), diameters (Dhole) and bone architectural properties were determined using microCT scans. The most important bone architectural property is the bone volume fraction (BV/TV), resulting in the significant predictive equations: Lhole=34.3 (⁎) Dnozzle(2)-17.6 (⁎) BV/TV+10.7 (R(2)=0.90, p<0.001), and hole Dhole=3.1(⁎) Dnozzle-0.45(⁎)BV/TV+0.54 (R(2)=0.58, p=0.02), with Lhole, Dhole and Dnozzle in mm. Drilling to a specific depth in bone tissue with a known BV/TV is possible, thereby contributing to the safe application of waterjet technology in orthopedic surgery. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Egypt | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 65 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 19% |
| Researcher | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 13 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 34 | 51% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 18 | 27% |
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 23 July 2013.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
#1,007
of 1,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,093
of 206,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,333 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 206,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.