Power Training in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Pilot Study on Feasibility and Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore the feasibility and efficacy of using a power training exercise programme for the quadriceps femoris (QF) in elderly women with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHOD: A one-group quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-intervention measurements was conducted on 17 older adult women with knee OA pain. A bilateral QF exercise programme (24 sessions over 8 weeks) consisting of 3 series of 10 repetitions of flexion-extension as fast as possible at 40% of their one-repetition maximum (1RM) was performed in an outpatient physiotherapy clinic. The primary outcome measures were the knee function and associated problems using the Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire and the weekly mean pain score from pain diaries using a visual analogue scale (VAS). QF strength (QFS), power (QFP) and work (QFW) were measured with an isokinetic dynamometer as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Significant improvements (p<0.05) were noted on the five categories of the KOOS. Significant decrease (p<0.01) was noted in pain intensity on VAS. QFP and QFW increased significantly on both sides (p<0.05). Exercise compliance was 99.5% for 16 participants. CONCLUSIONS: A short power-training exercise programme is a feasible training modality for patients with knee OA, and significant functional improvements can be achieved. Further studies must be conducted to better understand the effects of the programme parameters and the generalizability of the findings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".