Assessment of Decompressive Surgery in Dogs with Degenerative Lumbosacral Stenosis Using Force Plate Analysis and Questionnaires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term outcome after decompressive surgery in dogs with degenerative lumbosacral stenosis (DLS), using force plate analysis (FPA) and owner questionnaires. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective clinical study. ANIMALS: Dogs with DLS (n=31) and 24 clinically normal Labrador Retrievers. METHODS: FPA was performed before surgery (31 dogs) and at 3 days, 6 weeks, 6 months (each, 31 dogs) and >or=1.5 years (12 dogs) after surgery. Peak vertical forces (Fz(+)), braking (Fy(+)), and propulsive forces (Fy(-)), and the corresponding impulses were determined. Questionnaires were completed by the owners before and at 6 months and >or=1.5 years after surgery. RESULTS: Fy(-) of the pelvic limbs and the ratio pelvic/thoracic of Fy(-) (P/TFy(-)) were significantly smaller in dogs with DLS than controls. Fy(-) and P/TFy(-) decreased significantly 3 days after surgery, and increased during 6 months follow-up, but with long-term follow-up the values remained the same and were smaller than controls. From questionnaires there was a significant improvement after surgery compared with function before surgery. Most owners were satisfied with outcome after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Propulsive forces of the pelvic limbs in dogs with DLS are impaired and are partially restored by decompressive surgery. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Owner's questionnaires illustrate that decompressive surgery restores function as perceived by owners whereas FPA continues to show impaired propulsive forces for the pelvic limbs.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".