MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082737441 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.20.00078

Hip Muscle Forces and Contact Loading During Squatting After Cam-Type FAI Surgery

2020· article· en· W3082737441 on OpenAlexafffund
Danilo S. Catelli, K. C. Geoffrey Ng, Mariska Wesseling, Erik Kowalski, Ilse Jonkers, Paul E. Beaulé, Mario Lamontagne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de Technologie de CompiègneCiência sem FronteirasCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicineSquatting positionPelvic tiltSquatSurgeryHamstringPelvisPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare muscle forces and hip contact forces (HCFs) during squatting in patients with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (cam-FAI) before and after hip corrective surgery and with healthy control participants. METHODS: Ten symptomatic male patients with cam-FAI performed deep squatting preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Patients were matched by age and body mass index to 10 male control participants. Full-body kinematics and kinetics were computed, and muscle forces and HCFs were estimated using a musculoskeletal model and static optimization. Normalized squat cycle (%SC) trials were compared using statistical nonparametric mapping (SnPM). RESULTS: Postoperatively, patients with cam-FAI squatted down with higher anterior pelvic tilt, higher hip flexion, and greater hip extension moments than preoperatively. Preoperative patients demonstrated lower anterior pelvic tilt and lower hip flexion compared with the participants in the control group. Postoperative patients showed increased semimembranosus force compared with their preoperative values. Preoperative forces were lower than the control group for the adductor magnus, the psoas major, and the semimembranosus; however, the preoperative patients showed greater inferior gluteus maximus forces than the patients in the control group, whereas the postoperative patients did not differ from the control patients. Higher posterior, superior, and resultant HCF magnitudes were identified postoperatively in comparison with the preoperative values. Preoperative posterior HCF was lower than in the control group, whereas the postoperative posterior HCF did not differ from those in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Higher postoperative anterior pelvic tilt was associated with an indication of return to closer to normal pelvic motion, which resembled data from the control group. Lower preoperative anterior pelvic tilt was associated with muscle force imbalance, indicated by decreased semimembranosus and increased gluteus maximus forces. The overall increased postoperative muscle forces were associated with improved pelvic mobility and increased HCFs that were comparable with the control-group standards. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Muscle forces and HCFs may be indicative of postoperative joint health restoration and alleviated symptoms.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207