Augmented Rehabilitation Program for Patients 60 Years and Younger Following Total Hip Arthroplasty—Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the feasibility, safety and outcomes of a study comparing a 6-week post-operative rehabilitation program to usual care in patients ≤60 years undergoing elective unilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: A cohort of 24 THA patients were recruited during their 6-week postoperative visit to their surgeons. The community-based rehabilitation program, which was designed to improve function and increase activity, consisted of 12 structured exercise classes on land and water over 6 weeks. Physical activity was assessed using a Sense Wear Pro Armband (SWA). Participants completed the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and THA satisfaction questionnaire before and immediately after the intervention. Results: 14 participants received the augmented rehabilitation, and 10 participants were in the control group. All except one in the intervention group completed at least 80% of the sessions. The intervention group took significantly more steps/day (mean difference = 2440 steps/day, 95% CI = 1678, 4712) (p < 0.05), at the follow-up compared to baseline. The intervention group had a higher mean change of number of weekly PA bouts than the control group. Within the intervention group, all HOOS subscales were significantly higher at the follow-up compared to baseline. Conclusion: Findings provided pragmatic insight regarding the intervention and assessments of implementing an augmented rehabilitation program for elective THA.
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".