↓ Skip to main content

A Hybrid Reality Radiation-Free Simulator for Teaching Wire Navigation Skills

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of orthopaedic trauma, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
A Hybrid Reality Radiation-Free Simulator for Teaching Wire Navigation Skills
Published in
Journal of orthopaedic trauma, October 2015
DOI 10.1097/bot.0000000000000372
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Surgical simulation is an increasingly important method to facilitate the acquiring of surgical skills. Simulation can be helpful in developing hip fracture fixation skills because it is a common procedure for which performance can be objectively assessed (i.e., the tip-apex distance). The procedure requires fluoroscopic guidance to drill a wire along an osseous trajectory to a precise position within bone. The objective of this study was to assess the construct validity for a novel radiation-free simulator designed to teach wire navigation skills in hip fracture fixation. Novices (N=30) with limited to no surgical experience in hip fracture fixation and experienced surgeons (N=10) participated. Participants drilled a guide wire in the center-center position of a synthetic femoral head in a hip fracture simulator, using electromagnetic sensors to track the guide wire position. Sensor data were gathered to generate fluoroscopic-like images of the hip and guide wire. Simulator performance of novice and experienced participants was compared to measure construct validity. The simulator was able to discriminate the accuracy in guide wire position between novices and experienced surgeons. Experienced surgeons achieved a more accurate tip-apex distance than novices (13 vs 23 mm, respectively, p=0.009). The magnitude of improvement on successive simulator attempts was dependent on level of expertise; tip-apex distance improved significantly in the novice group, while it was unchanged in the experienced group. This hybrid reality, radiation-free hip fracture simulator, which combines real-world objects with computer-generated imagery demonstrates construct validity by distinguishing the performance of novices and experienced surgeons. There is a differential effect depending on level of experience, and it could be used as an effective training tool in novice surgeons.

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 3 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 44 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 %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 23%
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Librarian 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 11 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Psychology 2 5%
Decision Sciences 2 5%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,716,254
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from Journal of orthopaedic trauma
#1,736
of 3,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,231
of 311,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of orthopaedic trauma
#39
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,262 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 311,892 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.