↓ Skip to main content

Critical Findings on Magnetic Resonance Arthrograms in Posterior Shoulder Instability Compared With an Age-Matched Controlled Cohort

Overview of attention for article published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Critical Findings on Magnetic Resonance Arthrograms in Posterior Shoulder Instability Compared With an Age-Matched Controlled Cohort
Published in
The American Journal of Sports Medicine, August 2016
DOI 10.1177/0363546516660076
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Posterior shoulder instability is less common and potentially more difficult to diagnose clinically and radiographically compared with anterior shoulder instability. Radiographic findings including posterior labral tears, increased retroversion, presence of glenoid dysplasia, and increased capsular area are associated with symptomatic recurrent posterior shoulder instability. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and severity of associated radiographic parameters found on magnetic resonance arthrograms (MRAs) in patients with arthroscopically confirmed isolated posterior labral tears and symptomatic recurrent posterior shoulder instability, compared with an age-matched cohort of patients without posterior instability or labral injury confirmed with shoulder arthroscopy. Cross-sectional study, Level of evidence, 3. Patients who received a preoperative standard shoulder MRA at an academic institution over a 5-year period and had symptomatic posterior instability and received a repair of an arthroscopically confirmed posterior labral tear (n = 63) were identified. These patients were compared with an age-matched control group of patients without posterior instability (n = 49) who underwent an isolated arthroscopic distal clavicle resection that included an arthroscopic glenohumeral joint evaluation. Glenoid version, posterior humeral head subluxation, glenoid dysplasia, and linear and capsular area measurements were evaluated between the 2 groups. Interobserver reliability for continuous and categorical variables was assessed for all measurements. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that the presence of increased glenoid retroversion (P = .0018), glenoid dysplasia (P = .03), and increased axial posterior capsular cross-sectional area (P = .05) were significantly associated with posterior labral tears and symptomatic posterior shoulder instability compared with the age-matched control group. Posterior humeral head subluxation was found to be a statistically significant variable with univariate analysis (P = .001) for posterior shoulder instability but not with multivariate logistic regression (P = .53). Interobserver reliability was good to very good for all measurements (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.74-0.85; κ = 0.64) but was moderate for total capsular area and sagittal capsular area measurements (ICC = 0.43-0.56). The presence of increased glenoid retroversion, glenoid dysplasia, and increased posterior capsular area on MRA are significantly associated with posterior labral tears and symptomatic posterior shoulder instability. Identification of these critical radiographic variables on magnetic resonance arthrography assists in the accurate diagnosis and management of clinically significant posterior shoulder instability.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 10 13%
Other 7 9%
Student > Master 7 9%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 30 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 42 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 12 January 2017.
All research outputs
#10,599,239
of 34,251,523 outputs
Outputs from The American Journal of Sports Medicine
#3,510
of 6,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,636
of 345,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Journal of Sports Medicine
#125
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,251,523 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,791 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 345,377 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 194 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.