Activity and sports resumption after long segment fusions to the pelvis for adult spinal deformity: survey results of AO Spine members
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess recommendations for when adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients may return to athletic activities after surgery. METHODS: A web-based survey was administered to members of AO Spine. The survey consisted of surgeon demographic information and questions asking when a patient undergoing a long thoracolumbar fusion (> 5 levels) with pelvic fixation for ASD would be allowed to resume unrestricted range of motion (ROM), non-contact sports, and contact sports postoperatively. Ordinal logistic regression was used to determine predictors for time to resume each activity. RESULTS: One hundred twenty four members' responses were included for analysis. The majority of respondents would allow unrestricted ROM within 3 months postop (< 3 months: 81% vs > 3 months: 19%]. For when to return to non-contact sports, the most common responses were "2-3 months" (26.6%), "3-4 months" (26.6%), and "6-12 months" (18.5%). For when to return to contact sports, the majority advised > 4 months postop [> 4 months: "4-6 months" (19.2%), "6-12 months" (28.0%), " > 12 months" (28.8%) versus < 4 months: "1-2 months" (4.0%), "2-3 months" (1.6%), "3-4 months" (8.8%)]. 8.8% responded they would "never" allow resumption of contact sports. CONCLUSION: There was significant variation between surgeons' recommendations for resumption of unrestricted range of motion and sports following long fusion with pelvic fixation for ASD. An evidence-based approach to activity recommendations will require information on outcomes and complications.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".