Expert Consensus on Best Practices for Post–Acute Rehabilitation After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Canada and United States Delphi Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To synthesize professional and patient expertise with available evidence to recommend best practices for post-acute rehabilitation following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Two expert panels of clinicians, researchers, and patients from Canada and the US participated in a 3-round, online Delphi survey. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 22 THA and 24 TKA best practice key statements. Recommendations common to both procedures included the need for supervised rehabilitation interventions provided by trained health professionals early after discharge from the acute care setting to optimize patient outcomes. Personal and environmental contextual factors were identified as influencing the process and outcomes of THA and TKA rehabilitation. Routine outcome assessment was recommended and several standardized outcome tools identified. Short-term followup care in the first 2 years postsurgery was recommended for both procedures. Specifics on timing, rehabilitation providers, need for long-term followup, and interventions differed for THA and TKA. Some recommendations received different levels of support based on the type of panelist (patient, physical therapist, surgeon), professional role (clinician, researcher), and/or country. CONCLUSION: A rigorous consensus method led to key recommendations for post-acute rehabilitation after primary THA and TKA for OA, which together with available evidence and acknowledgment of contextual factors will inform the development of clinical practice guidelines. This is an important step toward reducing practice variation, closing the evidence-practice gap, and improving the quality of rehabilitation services after THA and TKA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".