Postoperative anemia does not impede functional outcome and quality of life early after hip and knee arthroplasties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinicians have adopted a restrictive transfusion threshold (75-80 g/L) after major orthopedic surgery. Anemia may be associated with a decrease in postoperative vigor. We hypothesize that, in these patients, a threshold hemoglobin (Hb) concentration exists below which functional recovery and quality of life (QoL) become difficult. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort study in 305 patients 60 years or older undergoing a total hip or knee arthroplasty was conducted. Major outcome variables were distance walked in 6 minutes (6MWT), score on the Borg Scale for perception of effort, maximal dominant hand strength, and Short Form 36 (SF-36) QoL assessment in the preoperative and early postoperative periods. Patients were categorized according to their Hb level the day of the postoperative 6MWT (≤ 80, 81-90, 91-100, and >100 g/L). RESULTS: There was no difference between Hb groups in the decrease of the distance walked preoperatively versus postoperatively. For both moments of observation, the 6MWT was not significantly different between Hb groups (p = 0.190). Similar results were found with perception of effort, maximal dominant hand strength, and SF-36 QoL assessment scores. In a regression model, the decrease in Hb concentration could explain only 1.9% of the total variation observed in the 6MWT (p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Moderate anemia is not associated with an impaired functional recovery or QoL in the immediate postoperative period after major arthroplasties. Further studies will be required to determine the long-term consequences of a restrictive transfusion strategy in these patients.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".