Exercise Therapy Interventions in Patients With Hip Osteoarthritis: Comparison of the Effects of DVD and Website-Based Interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prevalence of developmental hip dysplasia is high in Japan. Exercise therapy has been proven effective to treat certain aspects of hip osteoarthritis. Moreover, therapy provided via digital video discs (DVDs) and websites allows patients to exercise in the comfort of their own homes. However, no studies have evaluated the effectiveness of visual instructions in patients with hip disorders. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of exercise therapy administered via DVD and that administered via a website. METHODS: We developed a six-step progressive exercise therapy program for patients with hip osteoarthritis, which included three kinds each of open kinetic chain and closed kinetic chain exercises. Once the program was developed, exercise DVDs were produced. In addition to the six-step exercise program, our website was enabled to count the number of exercises performed by each patient and was accessible via the Internet at any time. Patients with hip osteoarthritis for whom surgery was not advised were enrolled by one university hospital in the Kansai area in Japan. Clinical symptoms and hip function were quantified using the Japanese Orthopedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ) and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Quality of life was measured using the SF-8 Health Survey, and self-efficacy for continued exercise was measured using the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES). Questionnaires were completed preintervention and after 6 months. RESULTS: At 6-month follow-up, 10 DVD users (1 male, 9 female; mean age 51.3, SD 16.1 years) and 18 website users (2 male, 16 female; mean age 52.4, SD 10.4 years) were reachable. The change in each parameter could not be confirmed a significant improvement. However, most items tended to reflect overall improvement during the 6 months of intervention (P=.05-.94; paired t test). Regarding effect size, we considered a small effect to be greater than 0.2. Little effect was observed for JHEQ pain, SF-8 physical component summary (PCS), and SF-8 mental component summary in the DVD group, as well as OHS, SF-8 (PCS), and GSES in the website group. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing the effectiveness of exercise therapy between our DVD and website, we found that although both groups tended to improve in physical function, only the website group showed tendency of enhanced self-efficacy.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".