| Title |
Clinical assessment tools identify functional deficits in fragility fracture patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s102047 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carmen Quatman, Tyler Ames, Corinne Wee, Khoi Le, Tiffany Wang, Julie Bishop, Laura Phieffer, Maurice Manring |
| Abstract |
To identify inexpensive, noninvasive, portable, clinical assessment tools that can be used to assess functional performance measures that may put older patients at risk for falls such as balance, handgrip strength, and lumbopelvic control. Twenty fragility fracture patients and 21 healthy control subjects were evaluated using clinical assessment tools (Nintendo Wii Balance Board [WBB], a handheld dynamometer, and an application for the Apple iPod Touch, the Level Belt) that measure functional performance during activity of daily living tasks. The main outcome measurements were balance (WBB), handgrip strength (handheld dynamometer), and lumbopelvic control (iPod Touch Level Belt), which were compared between fragility fracture patients and healthy controls. Fragility fracture patients had lower scores on the vertical component of the WBB Torso Twist task (P=0.042) and greater medial-lateral lumbopelvic sway during a 40 m walk (P=0.026) when compared to healthy controls. Unexpectedly, the fracture patients had significantly higher scores on the left leg (P=0.020) and total components (P=0.010) of the WBB Single Leg Stand task as well as less faults during the left Single Leg Stand task (P=0.003). The clinical assessment tools utilized in this study are relatively inexpensive and portable tools of performance measures capable of detecting differences in postural sway between fragility fracture patients and controls. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 32% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 23% |
| Sports and Recreations | 7 | 10% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
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 06 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,550
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,137
of 311,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#46
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 311,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.