{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,9,19]],"date-time":"2025-09-19T09:09:46Z","timestamp":1758272986981},"reference-count":16,"publisher":"British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery","issue":"5","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2011,5,1]],"date-time":"2011-05-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1304208000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/online.boneandjoint.org.uk\/TDM"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,5]]},"abstract":"<jats:p> We biomechanically investigated whether the standard dynamic hip screw (DHS) or the DHS blade achieves better fixation in bone with regard to resistance to pushout, pullout and torsional stability. The experiments were undertaken in an artificial bone substrate in the form of polyurethane foam blocks with predefined mechanical properties. Pushout tests were also repeated in cadaveric femoral heads. The results showed that the DHS blade outperformed the DHS with regard to the two most important characteristics of implant fixation, namely resistance to pushout and rotational stability. <\/jats:p><jats:p> We concluded that the DHS blade was the superior implant in this study. <\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620x.93b5.25539","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2011,4,21]],"date-time":"2011-04-21T16:23:37Z","timestamp":1303403017000},"page":"616-621","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":40,"title":["Dynamic hip screw <i>versus<\/i> DHS blade"],"prefix":"10.1302","volume":"93-B","author":[{"given":"F.","family":"O\u2019Neill","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Centre for Applied Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland."}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"F.","family":"Condon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Midwestern Regional Hospital, Dooradoyle, Limerick, Ireland."}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"T.","family":"McGloughlin","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Centre for Applied Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland."}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"B.","family":"Lenehan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Midwestern Regional Hospital, Dooradoyle, Limerick, Ireland."}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"J. C.","family":"Coffey","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Centre for Applied Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland."}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"M.","family":"Walsh","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Centre for Applied Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland."}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"42","reference":[{"key":"R1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF01623184"},{"key":"R2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S1568-1637(02)00045-4"},{"key":"R3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00005373-196411000-00001"},{"key":"R4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.injury.2005.04.014"},{"key":"R5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620X.72B1.2298790"},{"key":"R6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi JM. The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1995;77-A:1058\u201364.","DOI":"10.2106\/00004623-199507000-00012"},{"key":"R7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.injury.2005.01.017"},{"key":"R8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00005131-200310000-00004"},{"key":"R9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00264-002-0385-x"},{"key":"R10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00005131-200205000-00004"},{"key":"R11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2474-9-137"},{"key":"R12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.injury.2008.08.041"},{"key":"R13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clinbiomech.2008.07.004"},{"key":"R14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.injury.2006.06.008"},{"key":"R15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.injury.2007.03.014"},{"key":"R16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clinbiomech.2008.09.005"}],"container-title":["The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/online.boneandjoint.org.uk\/doi\/pdf\/10.1302\/0301-620X.93B5.25539","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/online.boneandjoint.org.uk\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1302\/0301-620X.93B5.25539","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/online.boneandjoint.org.uk\/doi\/pdf\/10.1302\/0301-620X.93B5.25539","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,16]],"date-time":"2021-08-16T19:01:34Z","timestamp":1629140494000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/online.boneandjoint.org.uk\/doi\/10.1302\/0301-620X.93B5.25539"}},"subtitle":["A BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON OF THE FIXATION ACHIEVED BY EACH IMPLANT IN BONE"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2011,5]]},"references-count":16,"journal-issue":{"issue":"5","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,5]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1302\/0301-620X.93B5.25539"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1302\/0301-620x.93b5.25539","relation":{},"ISSN":["0301-620X","2044-5377"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0301-620X","type":"print"},{"value":"2044-5377","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2011,5]]}}}