The Relationship between Kinesiophobia and Return to Sport after Shoulder Surgery for Recurrent Anterior Instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose To evaluate the relationship between kinesiophobia and patient's return to sport after shoulder stabilization surgery. The hypothesis was that kinesiophobia represents an independent factor correlated to the difference between preinjury and postoperative level of sport. Methods This study retrospectively evaluated 66 patients (mean age: 35.5, standard deviation [SD] = 9.9 years) and at a mean follow-up of 61.1 (SD = 37.5) months after arthroscopic Bankart's repair or open Bristow–Latarjet procedure. Kinesiophobia was assessed with the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK); return to the preinjury sport was assessed by the difference between baseline and postoperative degree of shoulder involvement in sport (D-DOSIS) scale. The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index (WOSI) was used to evaluate participants' perceptions of shoulder function. Results TSK showed correlation with D-DOSIS (ρ = 0.505, p < 0.001) and the WOSI score (ρ = 0.589, p < 0.001). There was significant difference in TSK and WOSI scores between participants who had and had not returned to their previous level of sport participation (p = 0.006, and 0.0001, respectively). Conclusion This study demonstrated that kinesiophobia is correlated to the return to sport after shoulder stabilization surgery. Level of Evidence Level IV, retrospective case series.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".