The association of WOMAC, HSS and isokinetic strength and fatigue of knee muscles in people with osteoarthritis following total knee replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent joint pathology and an important cause of disability among people over 65 years of age. Following total knee replacement (TKR), which may be the only curative intervention, function is mainly affected by quadriceps weakness whose extent can accurately be assessed using isokinetic dynamometry. AIM: To evaluate the association between the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Hospital for Special Surgery Score (HSS) scores and knee muscle isokinetic strength and fatigue findings in TKR patients 2–5 years postoperatively as well as assess the reproducibility and validity of the isokinetic test findings in this cohort. DESIGN: Twenty-four women who underwent TKR filled in the WOMAC and HSS questionnaires. The isokinetic test was carried out at 120 and 180°/s in concentric flexion/extension. The maximal isokinetic strength was evaluated as the peak torque (PT). Isokinetic fatigue was measured using the fatigue index and calculated based on 40 repetitions at 120°/s. The same protocol was performed 7 days apart. Test-retest reproducibility was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the standard error of measurement (SEM) and Bland Altman plots. HSS and WOMAC internal consistency was tested with Cronbach's alpha; questionnaire validity and correlations were obtained using Spearman's rho. RESULTS: The HSS Function sub-score was significantly correlated with quadriceps PT but not with fatigue isokinetic scores. Excellent reproducibility was indicated for all outcome measures, with the exception of the HSS Knee subscore and the fatigue index. CONCLUSIONS: Isokinetic dynamometry of the quadriceps can provide objective and useful information regarding the functional status of patients following TKR due to OA of the knee.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".