FUNCTIONAL IMPROVEMENT UP TO SIX MONTHS AFTER TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY: MEASURED BY KNEE RANGE OF MOTION AND SELF-REPORTED QUESTIONNAIRE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to assess knee range of motion (ROM) as well as patients’ reported pain, stiffness and function up to six months after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The secondary aim was to analyze the extent to which knee ROM correlates with patient-rated outcome. A prospective study included 60 patients with primary TKA for osteorthritis, admitted at Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinic from April 2009 to October 2014. The patients were evaluated at 4 time points: at admission and at discharge, as well as at follow-up at 3 and at 6 months after surgery. The outcome parameters included: active knee ROM, as well as pain, stiffness and function according to self reported Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) questionnaire. Statistically highly significant improvement in flexion and extension was observed from admission to all other assessment time points (p<0.001). Also, statistically significant improvement of all three WOMAC subscales (pain, stiffness and function) was found between all assessments points (p<0.001). According to values of Spearman correlation coefficient, there was significant negative correlation of flexion with all WOMAC subscales at all assessment points, whereas correlation of extension with any assessed outcome parameter was without significance. It can be concluded that in TKA patients all outcome measures improved significantly from admission to 6 months follow-up. Knee flexion ROM negatively and moderately to strongly correlated with pain, stiffness and function, whereas correlation of extension with any assessed outcome measure was without significance.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".