Formal Physical Therapy After Total Hip Arthroplasty Is Not Required
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The value of formal physical therapy after total hip arthroplasty is unknown. With substantial changes that have occurred in surgical and anesthesia techniques, self-directed therapy may be efficacious in restoring function to patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, randomized trial of 120 patients undergoing primary, unilateral total hip arthroplasty who were eligible for direct home discharge. The experimental group followed a self-directed home exercise program for 10 weeks. The control group received the standard protocol for physical therapy that included in-home visits with a physical therapist for the first 2 weeks followed by formal outpatient physical therapy for 8 weeks. Functional outcomes were measured using validated instruments including the Harris hip score (HHS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) preoperatively, at 1 month postoperatively, and at 6 to 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 120 randomized patients, 108 were included in the final analysis. Ten patients (19%) were randomized to unsupervised home exercise and 20 patients (37%) were randomized to formal outpatient therapy crossed over between groups. There was no significant difference in any of the measured functional outcomes between patients receiving formal therapy (n = 54) and those participating in unsupervised home exercise (n = 54) at any time point (HHS, p = 0.82; WOMAC, p = 0.80; and SF-36 physical health, p = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial suggests that unsupervised home exercise is both safe and efficacious for a majority of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty, and formal physical therapy may not be required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".