Improvement In Aerobic Fitness During Rehabilitation Following Hip Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients following hip fracture are unable to do vigorous exercise with their lower body. While most patients are able to ambulate a few days after their surgery, 'hip precautions' are in effect thus certain movements are restricted and lower extremity exercise is further limited due to pain. Alternate modes of exercise should thus be considered during rehabilitation. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of an upper body exercise program added to standard care on cardiorespiratory fitness in older adults with hip fracture during inpatient rehabilitation. METHODS: Twenty (81 ± 7 years; 14 women) older patients were randomly assigned to control (n = 10) and training groups (n = 10) who attended physiotherapy and occupational therapy sessions five times/week during rehabilitation (length of stay = 33 ± 5 days). The upper body training program was performed three times per week for four weeks using a custom-built arm crank ergometer. RESULTS: VO2peak increased significantly in the training group (8.9 ± 1.4 to 10.8 ± 1.7 ml/kg/min) with no change in the control group (8.9 ± 1.2 to 8.8 ± 1.6 ml/kg/min). At discharge, both groups significantly improved in all functional outcome measures (Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Timed Up and Go (TUG), Functional Independence Measure (FIM™), 2-minute walk test, 10-minute walk test). The training group performed significantly better in balance (BBS) and mobility (TUG, 2-min walk, 10-min walk) compared to the control group. For the training group at discharge, there was a significant correlation between VO2peak and the 2-min (r = 0.81) and 10-min walk tests (r = 0.85). CONCLUSION: The upper body exercise training group improved significantly more than the control group in mobility and balance measures. These results suggest that aerobic endurance exercise should be integrated into standard rehabilitation in order to enhance aerobic fitness and mobility for patients following hip fracture 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".