Physical Activity After Total Joint Replacement: A Cross-Sectional Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of physical activity participants are able to perform at a minimum of 1 year after primary total hip or knee replacement. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: A tertiary care arthroplasty center. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 170 primary total hip and 184 primary total knee arthroplasty patients. INTERVENTIONS: The University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score was mailed to 242 primary hip and 225 primary knee arthroplasty patients. Patients were abstracted from a prospectively tabulated arthroplasty database and pre-selected for good/excellent clinical outcomes as determined by 1 year postoperative Knee Society (KSS) and Harris Hip (HHS) scores. Clinical outcomes including the Oxford Hip/Knee score were collected preoperatively, and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Correlations between UCLA scores, demographics, and clinical outcomes were calculated using Pearson's correlation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Harris Hip Score, Oxford Hip Score, Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Score, and UCLA Activity Scale. RESULTS: : Postal survey response rates for hips were 70.2% (170 of 242) and 81.8% for knees (184 of 225). Mean results at postoperative year 1 include: HHS (94.8), Oxford Hip Score (16.6), KSS clinical score (95.9), KSS function score (95.0), and Oxford Knee score (18.2). For both primary total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty patients, median UCLA score was 6, indicating moderate activity levels at a mean follow-up of 40.7 months for hips and 36.6 months for knees. CONCLUSIONS: UCLA scores indicate the average total joint replacement patient maintains a moderate activity level, and many perform active/very active levels of activity.
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 | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".