ICF linked Dutch physiotherapy guidelines concerning initial assessment, treatment and evaluation in hip and knee osteoarthritis.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose: In 2001 the Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF) Guideline for hip and knee osteoarthritis (HKOA) was developed. Since then, many scientific papers on physical therapy interventions as well as national and international guidelines were published. Relevance: An update of the physical therapy guideline was needed to support the physical therapy practice in performing the best clinical practice based on current evidence inHKOA. Participants: This guideline is developed by a guideline development committee consisting 10 expert physical therapists working in different centers specialized in care for HKOA patients. Methods: Topics concerning the three guideline chapters: initial assessment, treatment and evaluation were selected by the guideline development committee. With respect to treatment a systematic literature search (up to June 2009) within various databases was performed aiming to identify reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of physical therapy interventions and the evidencewas graded (1–4). For initial assessment and evaluation mainly review papers and textbooks were used. Based on evidence and expert opinion, recommendations were formulated (5 consensus meetings and 8 feedback rounds) and graded (A–D). For the initial assessment, a description of relevant health related topics in HKOA was made according to the International Classification of Functioning, disability and health (ICF) core set for osteoarthritis (OA). Concerning treatment, 22 systematic reviews and 74 RCTs were reviewed. Analysis: A first draft of the guideline was reviewed by 17 experts from different professional backgrounds (2 feedback rounds). A second draft was field-tested by 45 physical therapists working in daily practice. The comments of both groups have been processed in the definite guideline. Results: Recommended were: exercise therapy, education and self management interventions, a combination of exercise and manual therapy, and postoperative exercise therapy in HKOA, and taping of the patella in knee OA. Neither recommended nor advised against were: balneotherapy, hydrotherapy, and preoperative physical therapy in HKOA; thermotherapy, TENS, and Continuous Passive Motion in knee OA. Not recommended were: massage, ultrasound, electrotherapy, electromagnetic field and Low Level Laser Therapy. For the evaluation of treatment goals the use of one or more of the following measurement instruments was recommended: daily activities and participation: Lequesne index,Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index questionnaire, Hip disability and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores, 6 Minute Walk test, Timed Stand Up and Go test and Patient Specific Complaint list; body functions and structures: Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Intermittent and Constant OsteoArthritis Pain questionnaire, goniometry, Medical Research Council for strength, Handheld Dynamometer. Conclusions: This update of the Dutch physical therapy guideline concerning HKOA included recommendations on the initial assessment, treatment and evaluation. The revised guideline has been launched in April 2010 and published on www.fysionet.nl (including an English translation). Implications: This guideline is helpful in physical therapy practice to perform the best practice based on current evidence. Working according guidelines is a requirement to stand registered in the Dutch physical therapy quality register.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,020 | 0,072 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,012 | 0,016 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,030 | 0,011 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».