The relative effectiveness of three full kinetic chain treatment protocols for osteoarthritis of the knee : manual therapy, rehabilitation and a combination thereof
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : Many treatment options provide symptomatic improvement of joint function for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. Research suggests full kinetic chain (FKC) manual and manipulative therapy (MMT) and rehabilitation yields greater benefits than home rehabilitation alone. However this treatment combination has never been compared against FKC MMT alone. Objectives : Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of three FKC treatment protocols in the management of knee OA. Method : A single-blinded, randomised comparative trial of sixty-six patients with knee OA, equally allocated to three treatment groups: manipulation only, rehabilitation only or manipulation plus rehabilitation (a.k.a. combination group). Manipulation groups received bi-weekly FKC treatment, while a daily at-home stretching and exercise programme was prescribed to the groups receiving rehabilitation. Treatment lasted three weeks, with outcomes measure taken at baseline, pre-visit 4 and 1-week follow up. Primary outcome measures included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and McMaster Overall Therapeutic Effectiveness (OTE) Tool. Results : There was a drop-out rate of 7.6% (n=5), with intent to treat analysis providing the missing data. All three treatment groups showed clinically and statistically significant changes in overall WOMAC scores from baseline to 1-week follow up. The combination group showed the largest improvement (50.5%), followed by manipulation (44.4%) and rehabilitation (33.6%). However, this difference between group improvement was not statistically significant (p= 0.156). Conclusion : All three intervention protocols showed statistically significant improvement in most outcome measures at 1-week follow-up. However, there was no statistically significant difference between groups and therefore it is concluded that the interventions appear to be equally effective in the short-term management of knee OA.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".