Three‐month efficacy of three knee braces in the treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis in a randomized crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immediate biomechanical and functional effects of knee braces are often reported, however, the duration and type of knee brace treatment for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) remain unclear. The objective was to evaluate usage, comfort, pain, and knee adduction moment (KAM) of three knee braces each worn 3 months by patients. Twenty-four patients with KOA were assigned in a randomized crossover trial a valgus three-point bending system brace (V3P-brace), an unloader brace with valgus and external rotation functions (VER-brace) and a stabilizing brace used after ligament injuries (ACL-brace). Functional questionnaires and gait assessment were carried out before and after each brace wear period of 3 months. A Friedman test was applied between brace wear diary recordings. Repeated measures analyses of variance contrasted the factors brace type (ACL, V3P, and VER), time (pre and post) and wear (without and with) on comfort, pain, function, and KAM. Brace usage was similar, but the V3P-brace was slightly less worn. Discomfort was significantly lowered with the VER-brace. All knee braces relieved pain and symptoms from 10% to 40%. KAM angular impulse was reduced with the three braces, but the VER-brace obtained the lowest relative reduction of 9%. The interaction between time and wear indicated that part of the KAM reduction with brace wear was maintained post treatment. All three knee braces have great benefits for pain and function among the medial KOA population. The VER-brace offers additional advantages on daily use, comfort and KAM, which could improve compliance to brace treatment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".