Six-month exercise training program to treat post-thrombotic syndrome: a randomized controlled two-centre trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise training may have the potential to improve post-thrombotic syndrome, a frequent, chronic complication of deep venous thrombosis. We conducted a randomized controlled two-centre pilot trial to assess the feasibility of a multicentre-based evaluation of a six-month exercise training program to treat post-thrombotic syndrome and to obtain preliminary data on the effectiveness of such a program. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive exercise training (a six-month trainer-supervised program) or control treatment (an education session with monthly phone follow-ups). Levels of eligibility, consent, adherence and retention were used as indicators of study feasibility. Primary outcomes were change from baseline to six months in venous disease-specific quality of life (as measured using the Venous Insufficiency Epidemiological and Economic Study Quality of Life [VEINES-QOL] questionnaire) and severity of post-thrombotic syndrome (as measured by scores on the Villalta scale) in the exercise training group versus the control group, assessed by t tests. Secondary outcomes were change in generic quality of life (as measured using the Short-Form Health Survey-36 [SF-36] questionnaire), category of severity of post-thrombotic syndrome, leg strength, leg flexibility and time on treadmill. RESULTS: Of 95 patients with post-thrombotic syndrome, 69 were eligible, 43 consented and were randomized, and 39 completed the study. Exercise training was associated with improvement in VEINES-QOL scores (exercise training mean change 6.0, standard deviation [SD] 5.1 v. control mean change 1.4, SD 7.2; difference 4.6, 95% CI 0.54 to 8.7; p = 0.027) and improvement in scores on the Villalta scale (exercise training mean change -3.6, SD 3.7 v. control mean change -1.6, SD 4.3; difference -2.0, 95% CI -4.6 to 0.6; p = 0.14). Most secondary outcomes also showed greater improvement in the exercise training group. INTERPRETATION: Exercise training may improve post-thrombotic syndrome. It would be feasible to definitively evaluate exercise training as a treatment for post-thrombotic syndrome in a large multicentre trial.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".