↓ Skip to main content

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy in Femoroacetabular Impingement

Overview of attention for article published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
16 X users
facebook
6 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
347 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
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy in Femoroacetabular Impingement
Published in
The American Journal of Sports Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1177/0363546517749475
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has become a more commonly recognized cause of limited hip range of motion and hip pain among young adults and athletes. Hip arthroscopy is recommended for the surgical treatment of this disorder, unless specific contraindications exist. Despite the increasing rate of published studies in this area, there remains no aggregate data for outcomes after this approach. To evaluate risk factors and outcomes after arthroscopic management of FAI, including return to play, revision rate, surgical and nonsurgical complications, change in α-angle, intraoperative bone resection, and patient-reported outcomes. Meta-analysis and systematic review. A review of the current literature was performed with the terms "femoroacetabular impingement," "hip arthroscopy," and numerous variations thereof in PubMed, EMBASE, BioMed Central, Cochrane, Science Direct, and Scopus, yielding 1723 abstracts. After screening by eligibility criteria, 31 articles were included. The incidence of bilateral FAI was determined by enrollment data, and pooled estimates were calculated for postoperative patient-reported outcome measures, α-angles, return to sport, postoperative complications, and reoperation risk. A total of 1981 hips among 1911 patients were identified, with a mean ± SD age of 29.9 ± 1.9 years and 29.5 ± 14.0 months of follow-up. The incidence of bilateral FAI in these studies that required operative intervention was 3.6%. The pooled risk of reoperation after hip arthroscopy, including revision surgery or subsequent total hip arthroplasty, was 5.5% (95% CI, 3.6%-7.5%). The risk of clinical complications was 1.7% (95% CI, 0.9%-2.5%). In total, 87.7% of patients demonstrated return to sport after surgery (95% CI, 82.4%-92.9%, P < .001), and all patient-reported outcomes improved postoperatively, with the highest increase observed in the Hip Outcome Score sports scale (41.7 points; 95% CI, 34.1-49.4; P < .001). The α-angle decreased by an average of 23.6° (95% CI, 18.2°-29.0°; P < .001). We identified 11 factors associated with the success of hip arthroscopy in FAI and 16 factors associated with failure or negative outcomes. A high percentage of patients return to sport activities after hip arthroscopy for FAI, with a low rate of complications and reoperation. All patient-reported outcome measures, except for mental health, significantly improved after surgery.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 347 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 347 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 33 10%
Student > Bachelor 33 10%
Other 29 8%
Student > Master 29 8%
Researcher 26 7%
Other 60 17%
Unknown 137 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 102 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 9%
Sports and Recreations 14 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 2%
Social Sciences 5 1%
Other 24 7%
Unknown 165 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 24 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,641,109
of 32,086,796 outputs
Outputs from The American Journal of Sports Medicine
#704
of 6,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,449
of 476,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Journal of Sports Medicine
#20
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,086,796 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 476,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.