EFFECT OF PHYSICAL THERAPY ON WOMAC SCORES AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To assess effect of physical therapy including both physical agents and exercise on pain, physical functioning and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Methods: Twenty-seven patients (25 female and two male) with knee osteoarthritis were included in the study. Besides sociodemographic variables, presence of chronic diseases, analgesic use, recreational activites were recorded. A standard knee examination was performed and anteroposterior and lateral knee radiographs were obtained. Pain was measured using visual analogue scale (VAS), numeric scale and Likert scale. Pain, stiffness and physical function was assessed using Likert-scaled version of the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). For quality of life evaluation Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) was utilized. Evaluations were done at baseline and 1 month after completion of physical therapy sessions. Results: Significant reduction of pain measurements namely VAS, numeric scale and Likert scale was observed as a result of physical treatment (p = 0.0001, p = 0.0001 and p = 0.001 respectively). In all 3 subscores of WOMAC (pain, stiffness and physical function) significant improvement was noted due to treatment (p = 0.0001, p = 0.012 and p = 0.0001 respectively). Similarly, physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain and vitality and social functioning subscores demonstrated significant reductions after therapy. (p = 0.039, p = 0.001, p = 0.0001, p = 0.001 and p = 0.035 respectively). Conclusion: Physical therapy including both physical agents and exercise leads to signifcant improvements in pain, physical functioning and quality of life. This change was demonstrated by both generic and disease specific outcome 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".