The effect of a preoperative exercise and education program on functional recovery, health related quality of life, and health service utilization following primary total knee arthroplasty.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a preoperative exercise/education program on functional recovery, health related quality of life (HRQOL), health service utilization, and costs following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: One hundred thirty-one subjects were randomized to either the control (n = 66) or treatment (n = 65) group 6 weeks before TKA surgery. Patients in the treatment group underwent a 4-week exercise/education program before surgery. All subjects were assessed 6 weeks preoperatively (before the exercise/education intervention), immediately preoperatively (after the exercise/education intervention), and 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery utilizing the Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index, the SF-36, and knee range of motion (ROM) and strength measures. Data on length of stay, numbers of community rehabilitation or homecare visits following discharge from the surgical hospital, and the costs associated with these services were also collected. RESULTS: Subjects were similar in demographic characteristics and all measurements at the baseline assessment. No differences were seen in knee measurements (ROM and strength), pain, function, or HRQOL between the 2 groups following the intervention program or at any postoperative measurement point. Patients in the treatment group used fewer postoperative rehabilitation services and stayed for a shorter time in hospital than the control group, but these differences did not attain statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The exercise/education intervention did not alter functional recovery or HRQOL following TKA. Health service utilization was less in the treatment group, but our study was underpowered to attain statistical significance for these measures.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".