Investigating the Efficacy of an 18-Week Postpartum Rehabilitation and Physical Development Intervention on Occupational Physical Performance and Musculoskeletal Health in UK Servicewomen: Protocol for an Independent Group Study Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postpartum women are at an increased risk of pelvic floor dysfunction, musculoskeletal injury, and poor psychological health and have reduced physical fitness compared to before pregnancy. There is no formal, evidence-based rehabilitation and physical development program for returning UK servicewomen to work following childbirth. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the efficacy of a rehabilitation and physical development intervention for returning postpartum UK servicewomen to occupational fitness. METHODS: Eligible servicewomen will be assigned to a training or control group in a nonrandomized controlled trial 6 weeks after childbirth. Group allocation will be based on the location of standard pregnancy and postpartum care. The control group will receive standard care, with no prescribed intervention. The training group will start an 18-week core and pelvic health rehabilitation program 6 weeks post partum and a 12-week resistance and high-intensity interval training program 12 weeks post partum. All participants will attend 4 testing sessions at 6, 12, 18, and 24 weeks post partum for the assessment of occupational physical performance, pelvic health, psychological well-being, quality of life, and musculoskeletal health outcomes. Occupational physical performance tests will include vertical jump, mid-thigh pull, seated medicine ball throw, and a timed 2-km run. Pelvic health tests will include the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system, the PERFECT (power, endurance, repetitions, fast, every contraction timed) scheme for pelvic floor strength, musculoskeletal physiotherapy assessment, the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 questionnaire, and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Vaginal Symptoms. Psychological well-being and quality of life tests will include the World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Musculoskeletal health outcomes will include body composition; whole-body areal bone mineral density; tibial volumetric bone mineral density, geometry, and microarchitecture; patella tendon properties; muscle architecture; muscle protein and collagen turnover; and muscle mass and muscle breakdown. Data will be analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, with participants included as random effects, and group and time as fixed effects to assess within- and between-group differences over time. RESULTS: This study received ethical approval in April 2019 and recruitment started in July 2019. The study was paused in March 2020 owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. Recruitment restarted in May 2021. The results are expected in September 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study will inform the best practice for the safe and optimal return of postpartum servicewomen to physically and mentally demanding jobs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04332757; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04332757. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32315.
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 | 0.032 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.007 |
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".