A COMPARISON OF HOME VS. PHYSIOTHERAPY-SUPERVISED REHABILITATION PROGRAMS FOLLOWING ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT (ACL) RECONSTRUCTION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine if there were any differences between a home-based rehabilitation program (H) and a physiotherapy-supervised program (PT) in patients following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS 145 patients (58% male), aged 16–59 years, were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. Inclusion: recreational athletes undergoing their first ACL reconstruction surgery with a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft. All patients attended a pre-surgery education class. Patients were randomized to either the H or PT group before surgery. H patients attended structured physiotherapy sessions at 1, 3, 6 & 12 weeks post-surgery (total of 4). PT patients attended 17 physiotherapy sessions over a 12 week period. All patients followed the same standardized rehabilitation protocol. Outcomes: knee flexion & extension range of motion (ROM); ligament laxity (KT2000); isokinetic quadriceps and hamstrings strength. Fisher's exact tests determined differences in the proportion of acceptable patients in each group. Clinically acceptable outcomes: ROM within 5° of the contralateral knee; ligament laxity within 5mm side to side difference; affected quadriceps strength ≥50% and affected hamstrings strength ≥75% of the contralateral. Sample size (1-β = 0.8): 59 patients per group to detect a 20% difference. RESULTS 12 week follow-up: N = 129. The H group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with acceptable flexion ROM (p = 0.03) & extension ROM (p = 0.02). No significant differences: ligament laxity (p = 0.36); quadriceps & hamstrings strength (p = 0.27, 0.16). The H group had a greater percentage of acceptable patients for ROM and strength. The PT group had a greater percentage of patients with acceptable ligament laxity. CONCLUSION These data demonstrate that the highly structured, minimally supervised rehabilitation program was successful for the return of knee ROM and strength in the first three months after ACL reconstruction. SIGNIFICANCE Reduced time and cost for physiotherapy.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".