Effects of hydrotherapy and land-based exercise on mobility and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Purpose] To determine the effects of hydrotherapy and land-based exercises on functional mobility and quality of life among patients with knee osteoarthritis. [Participants and Methods] We conducted a randomized controlled trial with knee osteoarthritis patients randomly allocated into land-based (n=17) and hydrotherapy groups (n=17). The Time-Up and Go (TUG), Five Times Sit-to-Stand (5STS), Stair Climbing Test (SCT), and Quality of Life by questionnaires including the Modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index questionnaire Thai version (Thai WOMAC) were assessed at baseline and 6 weeks. The World Health Organization Quality of Life BREF Thai version (WHOQOL-BREF-THAI) questionnaire were assessed at baseline and six weeks and 6 months. [Results] There was no significant difference in outcomes between the groups after 6-weeks and 6-months of follow-up. After 6 weeks, Thai WOMAC score improved in both groups. Only 5STS was improved in the land-based group, while the hydrotherapy group showed significant TUG, 5STS, and SCT improvement. Furthermore, only hydrotherapy showed significant improvement in WHOQOL-BREF-THAI scores in the mental, social, quality of health, and total domains after six months. [Conclusion] Both exercises equally improved functional mobility and quality of life. Hydrotherapy and land-based exercise could improve functional mobility and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".