↓ Skip to main content

Sonographic diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a study in 200 hospital workers*

Overview of attention for article published in Radiologia Brasileira, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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.
Title
Sonographic diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a study in 200 hospital workers*
Published in
Radiologia Brasileira, January 2015
DOI 10.1590/0100-3984.2014.0069
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adham do Amaral e Castro, Thelma Larocca Skare, Paulo Afonso Nunes Nassif, Alexandre Kaue Sakuma, Wagner Haese Barros

Abstract

To describe the prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a sample of 200 healthy hospital workers, establishing the respective epidemiological associations. Two hundred individuals were submitted to wrist ultrasonography to measure the median nerve area. They were questioned and examined for epidemiological data, body mass index, carpal tunnel syndrome signs and symptoms, and submitted to the Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire (BCTQ) to evaluate the carpal tunnel syndrome severity. A median nerve area ≥ 9 mm(2) was considered to be diagnostic of carpal tunnel syndrome. Carpal tunnel syndrome was diagnosed by ultrasonography in 34% of the sample. It was observed the association of carpal tunnel syndrome with age (p < 0.0001), paresthesia (p < 0.0001), Tinel's test (p < 0.0001), Phalen's test (p < 0.0001), BCTQ score (p < 0.0001), and years of formal education (p < 0.0001). Years of formal education was the only variable identified as an independent risk factor for carpal tunnel syndrome (95% CI = 1.03 to 1.24). The prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a population of hospital workers was of 34%. The number of years of formal education was the only independent risk factor for carpal tunnel syndrome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 45 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 22%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Other 3 7%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 13 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Engineering 3 7%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 15 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 November 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Radiologia Brasileira
#246
of 394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#266,629
of 359,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiologia Brasileira
#13
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 394 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 359,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.