Comparison of Health-Related Quality of Life Between Patients with End-Stage Ankle and Hip Arthrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: End-stage ankle arthrosis is one of the leading causes of chronic disability in North America. Information on this condition is limited. The amount of pain and the reduction in health-related quality of life and function have not been quantified with use of universal outcome measures. The purpose of the present study was to compare the extent of pain, loss of function, and health-related quality of life in two cohorts of patients waiting for the surgical treatment of end-stage ankle or hip arthrosis. METHODS: One hundred and thirty patients with end-stage ankle arthrosis who were awaiting total ankle arthroplasty or ankle arthrodesis were recruited through a Canadian Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society multicenter study. All patients prospectively completed the Short Form-36 (SF-36) generic outcome instrument. This cohort was compared with a similar cohort of 130 patients with end-stage hip arthrosis, randomly selected from an existing prospective joint replacement database, who had completed an SF-36 questionnaire prospectively from 2000 to 2005. RESULTS: In both groups, the scores for all SF-36 subscales were approximately two standard deviations below normal population scores. Patients with ankle arthrosis had significantly worse mental component summary scores (p < 0.05), role-physical scores (p < 0.05), and general health scores (p < 0.05). Patients with hip arthrosis reported significantly lower physical function scores (p < 0.05), although the SF-36 physical component summary score was not significantly different between the two groups. The SF-36 physical component summary, bodily pain, vitality, role-emotional, social functioning, and mental health subscale scores were equally affected in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The mental and physical disability associated with end-stage ankle arthrosis is at least as severe as that associated with end-stage hip arthrosis.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".