Preoperative education on realistic expectations improves the satisfaction of patients with central sensitization after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized‐controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether an additional module on realistic expectations following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) would lead to a higher proportion of satisfied patients compared to existing preoperative education. METHODS: This was a single-center, randomized-controlled trial. A total of 172 patients who were scheduled for TKA between September 2020 and October 2021 were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either only standard preoperative education, or an additional module on realistic expectations following TKA. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were Short Form-36, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, crepitus score, and range of motion. Subgroup analysis was performed based on central sensitization inventory (CSI) score stratification. Assessment was performed at the 3-month, 6-month, and > 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: At more than 1 year, 65/78 (83.3%) patients in the intervention group and 52/80 (65.0%) patients in the control group were satisfied (P = 0.03). The mean satisfaction score was measured as 4.2 ± 0.9 in the intervention and 3.9 ± 0.9 in the control at > 1 year (P = 0.01). There were significant differences in Short Form-36 physical and mental component summary scores and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and stiffness scores at 6 months (P = 0.02, P = 0.02, P = 0.04, P = 0.04). The frequency of satisfaction and mean satisfaction score in the top 25 percentile CSI group were 15/16 (93.8%) and 4.6 ± 0.6 in those who received intervention and 12/19 (63.2%) and 3.8 ± 0.8 in those who did not (P = 0.01, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Thorough preoperative education on realistic expectations following TKA showed effects on WOMAC pain and satisfaction at > 1 year after surgery. It was more prominent in the group with a higher CSI score at > 1-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".