↓ Skip to main content

Kirschner-Draht-Osteosynthese bei Frakturen im Kindesalter: Drähte versenken oder nicht?

Overview of attention for article published in Der Unfallchirurg, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Kirschner-Draht-Osteosynthese bei Frakturen im Kindesalter: Drähte versenken oder nicht?
Published in
Der Unfallchirurg, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00113-018-0465-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. Schneidmueller, M. Kertai, V. Bühren, C. von Rüden

Abstract

Kirschner wire osteosynthesis is considered to be the standard technique for surgical fixation of displaced supracondylar humeral and distal radial fractures in children. The Kirschner wires can be left exposed or buried under the skin. Advantages of the epicutaneous technique are, e. g. the efficiency (cost, effort) and the possibility for wire removal without the necessity of a second anesthesia. On the other hand, there is a concern about higher infection rates as well as traumatization of the children due to externally visible wires. A web-based survey of members of the DGU, DGOU, DGOOC, and the pediatric traumatology section of the DGU (SKT) was performed to evaluate current treatment concepts in Germany. The pros and cons for each technique were recorded and the need for a clinical study was examined. In addition, a cost analysis was performed for both methods. The results from the literature are summarized and discussed. A total of 710 questionnaires were evaluated. The majority of the respondents were trauma surgeons working in a hospital (80%). The buried technique was superior in both fracture groups (supracondylar humeral fractures 73% and distal radius fractures 69%), whereas a relevant difference could be found depending on the profession. The main reason for the subcutaneous technique was anxiety or observed higher infections using the epicutaneous technique. In Germany, the majority of wires are buried under the skin due to a fear of higher infection rates. In addition, other influencing factors such as pain and traditional approaches play a significant role. With respect to the results in the literature as well as a possible improvement of efficiency and avoidance of a second anesthesia, a multicentric clinical study seems necessary in the future to compare both techniques.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 3 50%
Student > Postgraduate 1 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 17%
Other 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 2 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 17%
Materials Science 1 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 17%
Other 0 0%

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 29 September 2018.
All research outputs
#11,314,737
of 12,719,839 outputs
Outputs from Der Unfallchirurg
#262
of 587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,645
of 270,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Der Unfallchirurg
#3
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,719,839 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 587 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 270,347 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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.