Effects of preoperative physiotherapy in hip osteoarthritis patients awaiting total hip replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization (WHO) claimed osteoarthritis as a civilization-related disease. The effectiveness of preoperative physiotherapy among patients suffering hip osteoarthritis (OA) at the end of their conservative treatment is rarely described in the literature. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of life and musculoskeletal health status of patients who received preoperative physiotherapy before total hip replacement (THR) surgery within a year prior to admission for a scheduled THR and those who did not. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-five patients, admitted to the Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology of Locomotor System for elective total hip replacement surgery, were recruited for this study. The assessment consisted of a detailed interview using various questionnaires: the Harris Hip Score (HHS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), as well as physical examination. Patients were assigned to groups based on their attendance of preoperative physiotherapy within a year prior to surgery. RESULTS: Among patients who received preoperative physiotherapy a significant improvement was found for pain, daily functioning, vitality, psychological health, social life, and (active and passive) internal rotation (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients are not routinely referred to physiotherapy within a year before total hip replacement surgery. This study confirmed that pre-operative physiotherapy may have a positive influence on selected musculoskeletal system status indicators and quality of life in hip osteoarthritis patients awaiting surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".