MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118947871 · doi:10.1093/ptj/85.12.1301

Physical Therapy Treatment Effectiveness for Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized Comparison of Supervised Clinical Exercise and Manual Therapy Procedures Versus a Home Exercise Program

2005· article· en· W2118947871 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gail D. Deyle, Stephen Allison, Robert L. Matekel, Michael Ryder, John M. Stang, David D. Gohdes, Jeremy P Hutton, Nancy Henderson, Matthew B. Garber

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWOMACMedicinePhysical therapyOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialExercise therapySurgeryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Manual therapy and exercise have not previously been compared with a home exercise program for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between a home-based physical therapy program and a clinically based physical therapy program. SUBJECTS: One hundred thirty-four subjects with OA of the knee were randomly assigned to a clinic treatment group (n=66; 61% female, 39% male; mean age [+/-SD]=64+/-10 years) or a home exercise group (n=68, 71% female, 29% male; mean age [+/-SD]=62+/-9 years). METHODS: Subjects in the clinic treatment group received supervised exercise, individualized manual therapy, and a home exercise program over a 4-week period. Subjects in the home exercise group received the same home exercise program initially, reinforced at a clinic visit 2 weeks later. Measured outcomes were the distance walked in 6 minutes and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). RESULTS: Both groups showed clinically and statistically significant improvements in 6-minute walk distances and WOMAC scores at 4 weeks; improvements were still evident in both groups at 8 weeks. By 4 weeks, WOMAC scores had improved by 52% in the clinic treatment group and by 26% in the home exercise group. Average 6-minute walk distances had improved about 10% in both groups. At 1 year, both groups were substantially and about equally improved over baseline measurements. Subjects in the clinic treatment group were less likely to be taking medications for their arthritis and were more satisfied with the overall outcome of their rehabilitative treatment compared with subjects in the home exercise group. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Although both groups improved by 1 month, subjects in the clinic treatment group achieved about twice as much improvement in WOMAC scores than subjects who performed similar unsupervised exercises at home. Equivalent maintenance of improvements at 1 year was presumably due to both groups continuing the identical home exercise program. The results indicate that a home exercise program for patients with OA of the knee provides important benefit. Adding a small number of additional clinical visits for the application of manual therapy and supervised exercise adds greater symptomatic relief.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations447
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207