ArticleMalaysian orthopaedic journal2022
Comparison between Hip Internal Rotation Assistive Device and Conventional Radiograph Positioning: An Experimental Study.
Article in Malaysian orthopaedic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Plain anteroposterior radiograph of the hip plays an important role in diagnosing hip pathology. However, one of the most common mistakes is image distortion because the hip is externally rotated due to natural femoral neck anteversion. Thus, the lower extremities should be internally rotated by 15°-20°. The researchers developed a hip internal rotation assistive device and compared it with conventional radiograph positioning. Materials and methods: A hip internal rotation assistive device was designed. This study consisted of 20 volunteers without clinical hip pathology. The volunteers were informed to do a hip radiograph twice to compare the efficacy of the developed device with a conventional positioning. The thickness of the lesser trochanter (TLT) was measured and interpreted by an orthopedist and a radiologist. Statistical significance and inter- and intra-observer reliabilities were analysed. Results: According to the orthopaedist's measurement, the mean TLT distance was 4.42 + 3.2mm and 4.97 + 3.16mm for the conventional technique and assistive device, respectively, without statistical significance between both groups ( Conclusion: The efficacy of the developed device was similar to that of the conventional technique. Inter/intra-observer reliabilities were at a good agreement level in both methods. The developed device would also be useful in clinical applications, especially in decreasing unnecessary radiation exposure of medical personnel.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.