MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Associations Between Flexion Deformity And Sagittal Gait Impairments In Knee Osteoarthritis Patients

2020· article· en· W3042039461 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicola Hagemeister, Manon Choinière, Nathalie J. Bureau, Nolwenn Eriau, Alix Cagnin

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSagittal planeOsteoarthritisDeformityRange of motionGaitPhysical therapyKnee flexionHeelKnee painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Knee flexion deformity and gait impairments (GIs) are common clinical findings in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients. This study aimed at assessing the associations between the presence of flexion deformity and sagittal GIs in KOA patients. METHODS: Patients were included if 1) KOA was the main cause of knee pain, 2) their worst pain in the past 7 days was ≥ 4 on a 0-10 pain intensity scale, 3) they had Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥ 2. Therapists involved in the study (N=10) assessed flexion deformity by goniometry. They assessed the presence of four known sagittal GIs in KOA patients (flexum at heel strike, fixed flexion during loading and during stance, limited dynamic range of motion (DROM) during a cycle) with a knee kinesiography. Fischer’s tests were used to assess between-group (presence or absence of flexion deformity) differences on the proportion of patients with each GI. RESULTS: 214 patients from 54 clinics participated. 61.2% were women, the mean age was 63 years (95%CI: 62;64), and the mean BMI was 29.4 kg/m2 (28.7;30.1). Almost one out of two patients (40.2%) had a flexion deformity. More than two thirds of the participants showed a limited DROM (69.2%). The proportion of patients with a limited DROM was significantly higher in the group who had a flexion deformity (+22.4%; p<0.001). However, more than half of the patients with a limited DROM did not have a flexion deformity (77/148: 52.0%). Similar results were observed on the three other sagittal GIs (Table; all p≤0.01). CONCLUSION: Results support that patients with knee flexion deformity are more likely to have sagittal GIs. However, the majority of patients who had sagittal GIs did not have a flexion deformity. It supports that it remains essential to assess deformity and also the value of completing clinical evaluation with a dynamic kinematic measurement to ensure that assessors do not miss the presence of gait alterations, even in the absence of flexion deformity.This was funded by the FPQIS (Quebec Government).

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→