Promoting health and quality of life of patients with osteoarthritis of knee joint through non-pharmacological treatment strategies: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic degenerative disorder which primarily affects the articular cartilage of synovial joints followed by bony remodeling and overgrowth at the margins of these joints. The consequences of OA are pain, joint stiffness, decreased muscle performance, and decreased aerobic capacity, which eventually affect the quality of life (QOL) and increased risk for disability. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of two nonpharmacological treatment regimens, that is, yoga and conventional physiotherapy, on QOL in patients suffering from OA of knee joint. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 83 patients with bilateral OA of knee joint, between the age group of 40 and 80 years, both males and females, were assigned into two groups using computer-generated scheme: 43 in the experimental group (yoga with conventional physiotherapy program) and 40 in control group (conventional physiotherapy program). Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA index (WOMAC) and Short-Form 36 (SF-36) health survey were measured before, after 15 days, and after 30 days of treatment sessions, and the data were analyzed using paired and unpaired t -test. RESULTS: The results of the study show significant improvement in both groups with regard to WOMAC and SF-36 at the end of 15 and 30 days of treatment regimen; however, when compared to the control group, experimental group had more significant improvement ( P < 0.05) in WOMAC and SF-36 at the end of 15 and 30 days of treatment. CONCLUSION: Yoga is more beneficial when added to conventional physiotherapy treatment regimen in promoting health and improving QOL in patients with OA of knee joint.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".