MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comparative Study To Determine The Effects Of Maitland Mobilization Vs.Mulligan Mobilization With Movement (Mwm) With Retro-Walking In Osteoarthritis

2022· article· en· W4284993144 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Khriesakuonuo Chadi, Abhijit Dutta, Abhijit Kalita, Trishna Saikia Baruah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Life Science and Pharma Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulliganOsteoarthritisMedicineWOMACPhysical therapyMobilizationRange of motionVisual analogue scalePhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationTimed Up and Go testAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic progressive degenerative disorder of multifactorial etiology causing greater disability and clinical symptoms among adults. Physiotherapy is the mainstay of non-pharmacological treatment in osteoarthritis. It has shown that manual therapy combined with supervised exercise program is effective in reducing pain, disability, improving range of motion and strength in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Our aim is to determine the comparative effects of Maitland mobilization vs. Mulligan mobilization with movement (MWM) with retro-walking in osteoarthritis. This is a comparative study where 30 subjects, both Male and Female with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis knee by the physician was recruited into two groups or intervention sequence with 15 subjects in each group. Group-A received Maitland mobilization with retro-walking and Group-B received Mulligan mobilization with retro-walking. Home exercise program was incorporated for both groups. All subjects received intervention thrice weekly for 4 weeks. Outcome measures were Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and 6 -minute walk test. Pre-Test and Post-Test was carried out for both groups and analyzed using paired and independent t tests in an SPSS software. It is concluded that both group-A (Maitland mobilization with retro-walking) and group-B (Mulligan mobilization with retro-walking) showed improvement post-treatment. However, the intervention given in group-B (Mulligan mobilization with retro-walking) showed significant improvement in VAS in terms of pain and WOMAC in terms of pain, stiffness and dysfunction compared to groupA (Maitland mobilization with retro-walking) whereas 6-minute walk test was found to be equally effective in both group-A and group-B. It is recommended for long term treatment and follow-up and retro-walking should be included in the rehabilitation of OA knee since the level of pain has been reduced.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Life Science and Pharma ResearchSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207