The efficacy of adjusting foot and ankle fixations in the treatment of sub-acute and chronic achilles tendonitis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of adjusting foot and ankle fixations compared to placebo in the treatment of sub-acute and chronic Achilles tendonitis. It is hypothesised that by adjusting those fixations in terms of the above would result in more of a significant improvement than placebo. Summary of the background data A search of the literature failed to reveal any studies on this topic. Study design A single blind, comparative, controlled study. MetllIods Forty subjects with sub-acute or chronic Achilles tendonitis were randomly divided into two different groups (Group 1 = 21 patients, Group 2 = 19). The ages ranged from 15 to 60 years. The first group received adjustments to any fixations present in the foot and ankle, whilst the second group received placebo (detuned ultrasound) only. Both groups received six interventions over a maximum period of four weeks. Subjective measurements were the McGill Short Form Pain Questionnaire and the Numerical Pain Rating Scale-l 01, and the objective measurements included algometer readings to assess pain threshold and goniometer readings to measure ankle dorsiflexion range of motion. All assessments were taken at the 1st, 2nd , 3rd, and final interventions. Results Significant improvements were detected between Group 1 and Group 2 in terms of percentage pain intensity between the 1st and 3rd and 1st and final visit. Significant improvements were detected between Group 1 and Group 2 in terms of pain threshold between the 1st and 2nd , 1st and 3rd and 1st and final visit. Significant improvements were detected between Group 1 and Group 2 in terms of pain experienced (quality and intensity), between the 1st and 3rd, and 1st and final visit. Significant improvements were detected between Group 1 and Group 2 in terms of ankle dorsiflexion range of motion between the 1st and 3rd, 1st and final visit. Statistical analysis within Group 1 showed significant improvements in pain experienced (quality and intensity) between the 1st and 2nd, 1st and 3rd, and 1st and final visits. Significant improvements were noted in ankle dorsiflexion range of motion between the 1st and 2nd, and 3rd, and 1st and final visits. Significant differences were observed in percentage pain intensity between the 1st and 2nd, 1st and 3rd, and 1st and final visits. Significant increases in pain threshold were noted between the 1st and 2nd, 1st and 3rd, and 1st and final visits.
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 | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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 ».