High-intensity preoperative training improves physical and functional recovery in the early post-operative periods after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The benefits of preoperative training programmes compared with alternative treatment are unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a high-intensity preoperative resistance training programme in patients waiting for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Forty-four subjects (7 men, 37 women) scheduled for unilateral TKA for osteoarthritis (OA) during 2014 participated in this randomized controlled trial. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Physical Functioning Scale of the Short Form-36 questionnaire (SF-36), a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS), isometric knee flexion, isometric knee extension, isometric hip abduction, active knee range of motion and functional tasks (Timed Up and Go test and Stair ascent-descent test) were assessed at 8 weeks before surgery (T1), after 8 weeks of training (T2), 1 month after TKA (T3) and finally 3 months after TKA (T4). The intervention group completed an 8-week training programme 3 days per week prior to surgery. RESULTS: Isometric knee flexion, isometric hip abduction, VAS, WOMAC, ROM extension and flexion and all the functional assessments were greater for the intervention group at T2, T3 and T4, whereas isometric knee extension was greater for this group at T2 and T4 compared with control. CONCLUSION: The present study supports the use of preoperative training in end-stage OA patients to improve early postoperative outcomes. High-intensity strength training during the preoperative period reduces pain and improves lower limb muscle strength, ROM and functional task performance before surgery, resulting in a reduced length of stay at the hospital and a faster physical and functional recovery after TKA. The present training programme can be used by specialists to speed up recovery after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".