MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556639349 · doi:10.1002/acr.23139

Early High‐Intensity Versus Low‐Intensity Rehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2016· article· en· W2556639349 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Bade, Tamara Struessel, Michael R. Dayton, Jared R.H. Foran, Raymond H. Kim, Todd Miner, Pamela Wolfe, Wendy M. Kohrt, Douglas A. Dennis, Jennifer E. Stevens‐Lapsley

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthInstitute of Clinical and Translational Sciences
KeywordsMedicineWOMACPhysical therapyHamstringRehabilitationRandomized controlled trialOsteoarthritisTimed Up and Go testRange of motionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationArthroplastySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the safety and efficacy of a high-intensity (HI) progressive rehabilitation protocol beginning 4 days after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) compared to a low-intensity (LI) rehabilitation protocol. METHODS: A total of 162 participants (mean ± SD ages 63 ± 7 years; 89 women) were randomized to either the HI group or LI group after TKA. Key components of the HI intervention were the use of progressive resistance exercises and a rapid progression to weight-bearing exercises and activities. Both groups were treated in an outpatient setting 2 to 3 times per week for 11 weeks (26 total sessions). Outcomes included the stair climbing test (SCT; primary outcome), timed-up-and-go (TUG) test, 6-minute walk (6MW) test, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), 12-item Short Form health survey (SF-12), knee range of motion (ROM), quadriceps and hamstring strength, and quadriceps activation. Outcomes were assessed preoperatively and at 1, 2, 3 (primary end point), 6, and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups at 3 or 12 months in SCT, TUG, 6MW, WOMAC scores, knee ROM, quadriceps and hamstrings strength, quadriceps activation, or adverse event rates. By 12 months, outcomes on the 6MW, TUG, WOMAC, SF-12, quadriceps and hamstring strength, and quadriceps activation had improved beyond baseline performance in both groups. CONCLUSION: Both the HI and LI interventions were effective in improving strength and function after TKA. HI progressive rehabilitation is safe for individuals after TKA. However, its effectiveness may be limited by arthrogenic muscular inhibition in the early postoperative period.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized trialhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized trialhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations140
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207