Effect of pre-operative physiotherapy in patients with end-stage osteoarthritis undergoing hip arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of pre-operative physiotherapy before hip arthroplasty in patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis. DESIGN: A prospective randomized controlled study. SETTING: Physical medicine and rehabilitation and orthopaedic departments of Policlinico Gemelli of Rome. SUBJECTS: Twenty-three patients randomized in study and control groups. INTERVENTION: The study group took part in an educational and physiotherapy programme one month before surgery. Both groups took part in the same inpatient rehabilitation programme after surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Both groups were evaluated one month (T0) and the day before arthroplasty (T1), after 15 days (T2), four weeks (T3) and three months (T4) post surgery, using the Barthel Index, the Short Form-36 (SF-36), the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Hip Harris Score (HHS), visual analogue scale (VAS), the British Medical Research Council (BMRC) measures of hip abductor and quadriceps strength and range of hip abduction and external rotation. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups with regard to the Barthel Index, SF-36, WOMAC and HHS at T4. The study group presented significant improvements of the SF-36 physical composite score at T1. The hip external rotation was significantly higher in the study group at each evaluation and the visual analogue scale values were lower at T1, T3 and T4. CONCLUSION: Pre-operative physiotherapy in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty does not improve impairment and health-related quality of life after intervention. Physiotherapy and educational therapy may be useful for end-stage osteoarthritis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".