Effect of Retrowalking on Pain, Functional Disability and Functional Mobility in Patients with Chronic Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disease involving the cartilage and surrounding tissues. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of retro walking in comparison with the Conventional closed chain exercise programme in chronic knee osteoarthritis patients. Study Design: Forty subjects participated in this study who had chronic Osteoarthritis of knee. Subjects were randomly assigned to two groups: Experimental and Control group. Experimental group followed Retrowalking and the Control group followed Conventional Closed kinematic chain exercises. Two primary outcome measures used were pain with functional disability and functional mobility which were measured using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and Timed up and go test respectively. The secondary measures included pain intensity, Strength of hip abductors, extensors, knee extensors muscles and knee flexion range of motion which were measured using Numerical Pain Rating Scale, manual muscle testing and universal goniometer respectively. Results: After comparing values using independent t-test, functional disability and mobility showed highly significant difference in experimental group than control group. Changes in pain intensity were equal for both the groups. Strength of hip muscles and knee Range of motion improved significantly in the Experimental group than control group. Conclusion: The study concluded that retrowalking was more effective than conventional closed kinematic chain exercises in reducing symptom, improving functional mobility, overcoming physical dysfunction and increasing strength of hip muscles in osteoarthritis of knee after 4 weeks of rehabilitation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".