↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Is cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty a safe treatment for femoral neck fracture in elderly patients?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Is cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty a safe treatment for femoral neck fracture in elderly patients?
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/cia.s85039
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fatih Karaaslan, emre yurdakul, Murat Korkmaz, Fuat Duygulu, Ali Baktır

Abstract

Controversy exists regarding the use of cement in hemiarthroplasty when treating a displaced femoral neck fracture in elderly patients. The primary hypothesis of this study was that the use of cement would afford better visual analog pain and activity scores in elderly patients. This study included 133 patients over 65 years of age admitted to our clinics from 2006 to 2012 for the surgical treatment of a displaced femoral neck fracture. All patients were treated via hemiarthroplasty. The patients (66 males, 67 females; mean age: 78.16 years; range: 60-110 years) were followed-up regularly. All patients were divided into one of two groups: group A was treated with cement; and group B without. Both groups were compared in terms of preoperative features (demographics and associated diseases), pre- and postoperative complications, mortality rates, pain and activity levels, and hip scores. Hospitalization time, average surgical duration, and time from fracture to operation were also recorded. Mean follow-up duration was 30.9 (range: 5-51) months. We found no significant between-groups differences in terms of length of hospital stay, Harris Hip Score, complications, or follow-up mortality rates. Walking ability and pain scores were better in the cemented group in the early follow-up period. Duration of surgery and perioperative mortality rates were somewhat lower in the cementless group, but the difference was not statistically significant. The use of cement during hip hemiarthroplasty in patients over 65 years of age had no negative impact on mortality or morbidity. Hemodynamic changes during cement application are important, but it is noteworthy that patients fitted with cemented endoprostheses had increased levels of activity and lower pain levels.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 2 5%
Unknown 40 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Other 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Sports and Recreations 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 26%

Attention Score in Context

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 08 November 2019.
All research outputs
#8,745,240
of 16,167,996 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#705
of 1,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,903
of 234,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#21
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,167,996 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 234,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 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 66% of its contemporaries.