Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Patients with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have impaired balance and movement control. Exercise interventions have not targeted these impairments in this population. Objectives The purposes of this study were: (1) to determine the feasibility of applying a balance exercise program in patients with TKA, (2) to investigate whether a functional training (FT) program supplemented with a balance exercise program (FT+B program) could improve physical function compared with an FT program alone in a small group of individuals with TKA, and (3) to test the methods and calculate sample size for a future randomized trial with a larger study sample. Design This study was a double-blind, pilot randomized clinical trial. Setting The study was conducted in the clinical laboratory of an academic center. Participants The participants were 43 individuals (30 female, 13 male; mean age=68 years, SD=8) who underwent TKA 2 to 6 months prior to the study. Interventions The interventions were 6 weeks (12 sessions) of a supervised FT or FT+B program, followed by a 4-month home exercise program. Measurements Feasibility measures included pain, stiffness, adherence, and attrition. The primary outcome measure was a battery of physical performance tests: self-selected gait speed, chair rise test, and single-leg stance time. Secondary outcome measures were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and the Lower Extremity Function Scale. Results Feasibility of the balance training in people with TKA was supported by high exercise adherence, a relatively low dropout rate, and no adverse events. Both groups demonstrated clinically important improvements in lower-extremity functional status. The degree of improvement seemed higher for gait speed, single-leg stance time, and stiffness in the FT+B group compared with the FT group. Limitations Due to the pilot nature of the study, differences between groups did not have adequate power to show statistical significance. Conclusions There is a need for conducting a larger randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of an FT+B program after TKA.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.008 |
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".