MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Sensitivity of Total Knee Arthroplasty Physical Function Outcome Measures

2006· article· en· W1988688485 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tiina T. Garrison, Jeffrey L. Garrison, David Pope, L Marsh, Robert H. Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWOMACMedicineOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyRating scaleTotal knee arthroplastyArthroplastySurgeryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most commonly used clinical outcome measures for assessment of function in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients are primarily subjective, and may lack sensitivity to detect functional improvement over time. PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to examine the sensitivity of four different outcome measures in TKA patients. METHODS: We studied the functional performance of 12 (n= 12) TKA patients, before, 6 weeks after, and 3 months after TKA using the traditional, but primarily subjective Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSCRS), and Short Form Physical Function (SF-36v.2) scales, and a recently developed objective functional assessment test known as the Continuous Scale Physical Function Performance test (CS-PFP10). Patients were 2 males and 10 females with an age range of 53–79. RESULTS: At baseline, the mean values for the CS-PFP10 total score, WOMAC Physical Function Score, affected knee function score of the KSCRS, and SF-36 Physical Composite scores were 33.38±19.52, 42±12.66, 33.38±9.25, and 37.32±9.42, respectively. At baseline, the CS-PFP10 total score and physical domain scores correlated well with the WOMAC, KSCRS, and SF-36 Physical Composite scores. At 6 weeks post-operative (post-op) assessments, all measures revealed functional improvement with mean values of 42.71±15.78 for CS-PFP10, 23.08±11.08 for WOMAC Physical Function, 49.62±9.99 for KSCRS Function Score, and 39.6±8.69 for SF-36 Physical Composite Score (p≤0.05). The CS-PFP10 total score and the KSCRS Function and Knee scores improved further from 6 weeks to 3 months post-op (p≤0.05). Also, CS-PFP10 domain scores of lower body strength, endurance, and balance and coordination further improved from 6 weeks to 3 months (p≤0.05). The mean scores for total CS-PFP10 and KSCRS function were 49.82±14.54 and 66.08±1 3.95, respectively. WOMAC and SF-36 scores did not improve from 6weeks to 3 months post-op. These data suggest that the CS-PFP10 is capturing the information gleaned from the traditional subjective outcome measures applied in TKA, but moreover, the CS-PFP10 appears to be detecting changes in function that occur between 6 weeks and 3 months post-op. CONCLUSION: The CS-PFP10 and KSCRS appear to be superior tests in situations where sensitivity to change in physical function is an important consideration. Continued examination of the CS-PFP10 and KSCRS may provide insight into choice of functional assessment instruments when working with TKA patients.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→