The effect of heat application on pain, stiffness, physical function and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim in this study was to evaluate the effect of local heat application on pain, stiffness, physical function and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis. BACKGROUND: Local heat application is used as a non-pharmacological practice for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. On the other hand, literature reveals limited information on the effects of heat application. DESIGN: The study was a comparative study. METHODS: The patients with knee osteoarthritis were divided into two groups (23 patients in each) as intervention and control groups, and patients in the control group were applied with the routine medication of the physician. The intervention group received 20-minute heat application every other day for four weeks in addition to the routine medication. The data were collected using data collection form, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index and SF-36. RESULTS: The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities pain and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities disability scores of the patients with knee osteoarthritis in control and intervention groups before and after the intervention were compared, and the differences for both scores in the change were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). Moreover, statistically significant differences were found between the control and intervention group patients in terms of changes in the scores for physical function, pain and general health perception (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: It was found that heat application every other day decreased pain and disability of the patients with knee osteoarthritis. Also, heat application was found to improve the subdimensions of quality of life scores of physical function, pain and general health perception of patients. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The data obtained in this study on the efficiency of heat application on pain, stiffness, physical function and general health perception of patients with knee osteoarthritis may offer an insight into decision-making process for appropriate intervention.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".