Change in patient concerns following total knee arthroplasty described with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: a repeated measures design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no published evidence of how patient concerns change during the first six weeks following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). An understanding of the recovery process from the patient's perspective will inform clinicians on how to best educate patients about their post-operative concerns. Our objectives were to (1) quantify the level of importance for each of 32 previously identified concerns pre-operatively, and across the first six weeks following primary TKA and, (2) convey this change in importance post-operatively using the components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). METHODS: The objectives were achieved using a repeated measures design. Convenience sampling was used to recruit 54 consecutive patients undergoing primary TKA at a hospital in Ontario, Canada. Pre-operatively and at two, four and six weeks post-operatively subjects rated the level of importance for each of the 32 previously identified patient concerns RESULTS: The importance rating of patient concerns in all four ICF components changed from before surgery to two weeks after surgery. Patient concerns in the Participation component became increasingly important after the first two weeks following surgery. Post-operatively from week two to week four, changes in importance ratings were also found in the Body Function and Activity components, but not in the Environmental Factors component. CONCLUSION: Changes in patient concerns mirror their early recovery from TKA surgery. Consistent with this, Participation restrictions become increasingly important to patients after discharge from acute care suggesting that clinicians should think of managing patient expectations for return to societal roles early in post-operative rehabilitation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".