DEVELOPMENT OF LOW-COST 3D PRINTED ACETABULAR FRACTURE MODELS FOR SURGICAL PLANNING
2020
- 17Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage17
- Abstract Views17
Interview Description
Introduction: The use of 3D printed anatomical models is continuing to improve surgical conditions across multiple fields. While many articles encourage the use of anatomical models, few articles discuss the guidelines for their overall production and what methods are acceptable to use for different purposes. The purpose of the current research is to compare 3D printed acetabular fracture models produced using different methodologies for use in surgical planning.Research design and methods: Five acetabular fracture models were developed from de-identified CT data using segmentation software and 3D printers at different price points. The measurement error in the printed models representation of the fracture and survey results of the model’s utility as a method of surgical planning were analyzed using one-way ANOVAs.Results: Significant differences were found on the model’s representation of the acetabular fracture on both the physical measurements and the survey information (p = 0.007 and p = 0.008, respectively).Conclusion: It is likely that anatomical models developed at any price point will be sufficient in providing some level of improved anatomy conceptualization. However, the results from this research indicate slight differences likely exist as a result of the method used to develop the model.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know