This biomechanical study was performed to evaluate a new modular, tibial testing system developed for analysis of tibial nails and their locking screws.A new testing system, consisting of five modules, was designed to simulate a tibia. For this study one module was removed to simulate a 55-mm distal tibial defect inducing maximum loading on the distal portion of the implant and locking bolts. The tibial load offsets were 23 mm proximally and 10 mm distally medial to the centreline of the tibial shaft to simulate the location of the expected resultant load during the peak loading and inversion torque on the ankle during the gait cycle. Four solid tibial nails (STN, Stryker-Howmedica-Osteonics, Kiel, Germany) were tested to static failure and 15 nails were tested dynamically. Our results showed that the solid tibial nails fractured in the testing device in the same manner and location as they do in clinical series. Evaluation of the results showed the mean fatigue limit of the STN to be 1.4 kN for 500,000 cycles with a standard deviation (S.D.) of 0.33 kN. This biomechanical study establishes a standard technique for the biomechanical testing of tibial nails, in a clinically relevant manner, avoiding the inconsistency of cadaver bone tests. As it is a standardised test set-up this new modular testing system could serve as a standard by which small diameter tibial nails and other devices could be evaluated and compared with other systems currently in use.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 May 2013.
All research outputs
#9,515,244
of 27,776,330 outputs
Outputs from Injury
#1,345
of 3,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,389
of 51,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Injury
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,776,330 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,717 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 51,303 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
