↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Versus Multiple Posterior Column Osteotomies in Severe and Rigid Neuromuscular Scoliosis
Published in
Spine, August 2018
DOI 10.1097/brs.0000000000002538
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Retrospective analysis. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of the apical pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) technique with multiple posterior column osteotomies (PCOs) in nonambulatory patients with severe, rigid neuromuscular scoliosis. Neuromuscular scoliosis frequently causes intolerance to sitting due to pelvic obliquity, trunk decompensation, and associated back and rib impingement pain which diminish the patient's functional capacity. In the case of rigid curves, spinal osteotomy techniques are occasionally required for effective correction. We retrospectively reviewed our patients with severe and rigid neuromuscular scoliosis with associated pelvic obliquity who were treated with posterior instrumented fusion extending to pelvis with more than 1-year postoperative follow-up. We compared radiological and clinical results of PSO and multiple PCO techniques in severe rigid neuromuscular scoliosis with pelvic obliquity of more than 15° in traction radiograph under general anesthesia. Hospital records were also reviewed for operative time, intraoperative blood loss, amount of blood transfusion, duration of hospital stay, and complications. There were 12 patients in the PSO group and 10 patients in the PCO group. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of major curve magnitude, sagittal parameters or pelvic obliquity. Although not statistically significant, PSO technique did trend toward better scoliosis correction (post-op Cobb angle 56.1° vs. 66.7° [P = 0.415]). PSO technique provided a significantly better correction in pelvic obliquity (59% vs. 84%) (P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in average intraoperative blood loss, transfusion, and operative times including anesthesia time, hospital stay, or complications. PSO may be an option in correction of severe and rigid neuromuscular scoliosis. It provides better correction of pelvic obliquity without increasing operative time, need for transfusion, or duration of hospitalization as compared to multiple apical PCO technique. Traction radiograph under general anesthesia is a valuable tool in surgical decision making. 4.

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 66 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 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 11%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 26 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 34 52%
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 15 April 2019.
All research outputs
#23,088,418
of 34,517,649 outputs
Outputs from Spine
#6,739
of 10,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,758
of 372,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Spine
#48
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,517,649 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 372,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 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 54% of its contemporaries.