MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3145445142 · doi:10.1186/s13018-021-02367-9

Gap balancing improve squat function and knee function: a randomized controlled trial comparing gap balancing and measured resection

2021· article· en· W3145445142 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qingfang Xiao, Bo Liu, Binghao Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisRange of motionRandomized controlled trialOrthopedic surgerySquatSurgeryKnee JointOxford knee scoreArthroplastyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We compared the measured resection (MR) technique and the gap balancing (GB) technique in patients with knee osteoarthritis after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in China to understand the effects of the two techniques on knee function and squat function. METHODS: From March 2017 to September 2019, a prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted with 96 patients with knee osteoarthritis undergoing primary TKA from March 2017 to September 2019 randomized to GB group (n = 48) and MR group (n = 48). Intraoperative indicators (operation time, osteotomy volume of medial and lateral of posterior femoral condyles, external rotation angle) were recorded during operation. At 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, all the patients came to the hospital for review and underwent the pain severity, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), knee joint range of motion, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and American Knee Society Score (AKSS) tests. All patients were followed up for more than 1 year. RESULTS: The osteotomy volume of the medial femoral condyle in the GB group was higher than that in the MR group (P<0.05), and the operation time in the GB group was shorter than that in the MR group (P<0.05). At 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, the pain severity in the GB group was lower than that in the MR group (P<0.05), the knee range of motion in the GB group was larger than that in the MR group (P<0.05), the WOMAC of the GB group was lower than that of the MR group (P<0.05), the OKS of the GB group was higher than that of the MR group (P<0.05), the AKSS of the GB group was higher than that of the MR group. The incidence of postoperative complications in the GB group (4.17%) was significantly lower than that in the MR group (18.75%) (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The GB technique can effectively shorten the operation time, relieve pain, improve knee range of motion, improve squat function and knee function, reduce osteoarthritis index, and reduce the occurrence of complications, which is worthy of clinical popularization and application.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery and ResearchSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207