MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1873436704 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0136854

A Yoga Strengthening Program Designed to Minimize the Knee Adduction Moment for Women with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Proof-Of-Principle Cohort Study

2015· article· en· W1873436704 on OpenAlexafffund
Elora C. Brenneman, Alexander B. Kuntz, Emily G. Wiebenga, Monica R. Maly

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicinePhysical therapyGaitPhysical medicine and rehabilitationKnee painElectromyographyStair climbingKnee JointRheumatologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: People with knee osteoarthritis may benefit from exercise prescriptions that minimize knee loads in the frontal plane. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether a novel 12-week strengthening program designed to minimize exposure to the knee adduction moment (KAM) could improve symptoms and knee strength in women with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. A secondary objective was to determine whether the program could improve mobility and fitness, and decrease peak KAM during gait. The tertiary objective was to evaluate the biomechanical characteristics of this yoga program. In particular, we compared the peak KAM during gait with that during yoga postures at baseline. We also compared lower limb normalized mean electromyography (EMG) amplitudes during yoga postures between baseline and follow-up. Primary measures included self-reported pain and physical function (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) and knee strength (extensor and flexor torques). Secondary measures included mobility (six-minute walk, 30-second chair stand, stair climbing), fitness (submaximal cycle ergometer test), and clinical gait analysis using motion capture synchronized with electromyography and force measurement. Also, KAM and normalized mean EMG amplitudes were collected during yoga postures. Forty-five women over age 50 with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, consistent with the American College of Rheumatology criteria, enrolled in our 12-week (3 sessions per week) program. Data from 38 were analyzed (six drop-outs; one lost to co-intervention). Participants experienced reduced pain (mean improvement 10.1–20.1 normalized to 100; p<0.001), increased knee extensor strength (mean improvement 0.01 Nm/kg; p = 0.004), and increased flexor strength (mean improvement 0.01 Nm/kg; p = 0.001) at follow-up compared to baseline. Participants improved mobility on the six-minute walk (mean improvement 37.7 m; p<0.001) and 30-second chair stand (mean improvement 1.3; p = 0.006) at follow-up compared to baseline. Fitness and peak KAM during gait were unchanged between baseline and follow-up. Average KAM during the yoga postures were lower than that of normal gait. Normalized mean EMG amplitudes during yoga postures were up to 31.0% of maximum but did not change between baseline and follow-up. In this cohort study, the yoga-based strengthening postures that elicit low KAMs improved knee symptoms and strength in women with knee OA following a 12 week program (3 sessions per week). The program also improved mobility, but did not improve fitness or reduce peak KAM during gait. The KAM during the yoga postures were lower than that of normal gait. Overall, the proposed program may be useful in improving pain, strength, and mobility in women with knee osteoarthritis. Clinical efficacy needs to be assessed using a randomized controlled trial design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02146105.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations35
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→