Exercise Improves Early Functional Recovery After Total Hip Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this prospective, randomized study was to apply an 8-week customized exercise program to patients (Group E) scheduled for total hip arthroplasty, followed by a postsurgery exercise program, and show the effect on functional recovery compared with control subjects (Group C) who received no additional exercise apart from routine in-hospital physical therapy. Strength, range of motion, and physical function tests were completed by 57 patients at Week 8 and Week 1 before surgery and at Weeks 3, 12, and 24 postoperatively. No differences between the exercise and control groups were observed at baseline. By 1 week before surgery, patients in Group E had shown significant improvements for Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (total score, stiffness, and physical function components), and combined hip strength. Patients in Group E had improved hip flexion range of motion in the diseased hip compared with patients in Group C. Significant differences in outcome measures between Group E and Group C were observed throughout the postoperative phase from Weeks 3 to 24. The current study showed that customized perioperative exercise programs are well tolerated by patients with end-stage hip arthritis, and are effective in improving early recovery of physical function after total hip arthroplasty.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".