MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1496701996

HIP disability : Patient education, classification and assessment

2003· dissertation· en· W1496701996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Klässbo

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2003
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyRehabilitation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hip disability is common and entails activity limitations, participation restrictions and increased risk of further disability and health problems, partially due to inactivity. Hip osteoarthritis (OA), the major diagnosis, is difficult to define, especially when no joint space narrowing is seen in radiography. However, radiological hip OA can be asymptomatic. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) has developed clinical classification criteria for symptomatic hip OA, including two range-of-motion (ROM) variables: flexion and internal rotation. It has been clinically accepted that hip OA, with joint capsule involvement, occasions a "capsular pattern" of decreased ROM, but the exact ordering of the directions is controversial. Patient education in groups is an important supplement to individual treatment and is recommended by the ACR and the European League of Associations of Rheumatology for patients with OA.
\n
\n
\n
\nThe overall objective of the present thesis was to develop early educational treatment in primary care for people with hip disability - a Hip School - and to assess its effects on self-rated hip problems and health-related quality of life. Further objectives were to analyse common diagnostic and classification criteria and to improve instruments for assessing self-rated hip problems.
\n
\n
\n
\nThe Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), available in both knee and hip formats, was translated into Swedish and tested. A Hip School led by physiotherapists was developed covering, among other things, self-help hints (e.g. advice about daily physical activity to appropriate extents for at least a total of 30 minutes, hip ROM training at the end point of motion, and not sitting for longer than 20 minutes at a time). For assessment of the Hip School, persons with hip disability were recruited to a treatment group (n = 77) or to a control group (n = 68). Self-rated hip problems were assessed with the WOMAC and health-related quality of life with the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) before and 6 months after the Hip School. The treatment group was also tested after an additional 6 months. For 168 persons with hip disability, passive range of motion (PROM) was tested in six directions with a goniometer. PROM limitations were calculated with three different norms and arranged by size in PROM patterns. The patterns and the number of hips with patterns corresponding to proposed capsular patterns were counted. Fifty-two persons with hip disability answered an extended version of the WOMAC twice with a one-week interval. Reproducibility, percentage of zero scores (best possible score) and mean scores of symptoms and perceived importance were analysed.
\n
\n
\n
\nThe results showed that the Swedish version of WOMAC is a reliable, valid, and responsive instrument with measurement qualities in agreement with the original version. Assessment of the Hip School showed that the participants reduced their pain and activity limitations and improved their health-related quality of life after 6 months with maintained effects after one year. It was not possible to predict radiological evidence of hip OA from the multitude of PROM patterns. No support was found for the existence of a hip joint "capsular pattern". The failure of the clinical signs to coincide satisfactorily with radiographic hip OA was further emphasised when the ACR clinical classification criteria were used, as they achieved a sensitivity of 85% and a specificity of 25%. Gender and other factors such as age, ROM exercise and other ROM-demanding habits influence PROM. Being male contributed almost as much as having hip OA to the risk of having decreased hip ROM. The extended instrument Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS), appears to be evaluative with increased ability, especially in early-stage hip disability, to detect clinically important change over time.
\n
\n
\n
\nIt is concluded that the Hip School can be a useful early treatment strategy for persons with hip disability. It is not possible to diagnose hip OA with "capsular patterns" or to classify hip OA in early cases from reduction in PROM directions. HOOS can be used to assess treatment strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207