Comparison of Home Health Care Physical Therapy Outcomes Following Total Knee Replacement With and Without Subacute Rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Few studies have examined the rehabilitation progression of patients managed through home health care physical therapy services following total knee replacement surgery. This study compares the episodes of care and functional outcomes of patients sent directly home to those discharged to a subacute rehabilitation setting prior to home health care. METHODS: Prospective data were collected from 212 consecutive home health care patients referred for physical therapy following total knee replacement surgery. Data routinely recorded by the physical therapist at each home visit related to ambulatory progression and physical status was used in analysis. RESULTS: Patients admitted to the subacute facilities on hospital discharge were older and less likely to have a caregiver in or near the home. Equivalent physical therapy outcomes were seen regardless of hospital discharge disposition, although patients admitted to subacute rehabilitation settings required an additional 12.4 days. Younger patients admitted to subacute rehabilitation settings demonstrated less desirable outcomes at time of initial home visit, although these differences disappeared by time of discharge from home health care. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that direct discharge home following total knee replacement surgery is a viable option for many patients. The application of evidence to physical therapy practice can promote more informed decision-making and foster the use of best practice in the home health care setting.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".