Virtual reality-based rehabilitation in patients following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Physical therapy is regarded as an essential aspect in achieving optimal outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has made face-to-face rehabilitation inaccessible. Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly regarded as a potentially effective option for offering health care interventions. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate VR-based rehabilitation's effectiveness on outcomes following TKA. Methods: From inception to May 22, 2021, PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, PsycINFO, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang were comprehensively searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of VR-based rehabilitation on patients following TKA according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Results: Eight studies were included in the systematic review, and seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. VR-based rehabilitation significantly improved visual analog scale (VAS) scores within 1 month (standardized mean difference [SMD]: −0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.79 to −0.08, P = 0.02), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) within 1 month (SMD: −0.71; 95% CI: −1.03 to −0.40, P < 0.01), and the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Score (HSS) within 1 month and between 2 months and 3 months (MD: 7.62; 95% CI: 5.77 to 9.47, P < 0.01; MD: 10.15; 95% CI: 8.03 to 12.27, P < 0.01; respectively) following TKA compared to conventional rehabilitation. No significant difference was found in terms of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test. Conclusions: VR-based rehabilitation improved pain and function but not postural control following TKA compared to conventional rehabilitation. More high-quality RCTs are needed to prove the advantage of VR-based rehabilitation. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, it is necessary to promote this rehabilitation model.
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 | 0.014 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".