MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385670584 · doi:10.7860/jcdr/2023/63345.18238

Effect of Home-Based versus Clinic-Based Exercise Training on Balance and Function in the Geriatric Population with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Non Randomised Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4385670584 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chirag Jeram Parmar, Trupti Kavit Munshi

Bibliographic record

VenueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Training Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical therapyMedicineWOMACBerg Balance ScaleBalance (ability)OsteoarthritisTimed Up and Go testMann–Whitney U testWilcoxon signed-rank testPopulationDynamic balanceRandomized controlled trialPhysical medicine and rehabilitationBalance trainingKnee painAlternative medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Knee Osteoarthritis (OA) affects 30-40% of the population worldwide by the age of 65 years and is associated with proprioception loss, postural instability, and fall risk. Strengthening and balance exercises at home can prevent these issues. The Otago home exercise program is commonly used for fall prevention in the elderly. Aim: To compare the effects of home-based and clinic-based exercise training on balance and function in geriatric individuals with knee OA. Materials and Methods: A non randomised controlled trial (NRCT) was conducted from October 2017 to December 2017 at an old age home and residential zone of Ahmedabad city. Nineteen participants were divided into two groups: group A (home-based exercise) with nine participants, and group B (clinicbased exercise) with ten participants. The exercises were based on the Otago program. The study duration was eight weeks, and outcome measures included the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) for static and dynamic balance, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) for physical function, the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test for dynamic balance, and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for knee pain. Data analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) version 22.0, employing the Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney tests for within group and between group comparisons, respectively. Results: Group A (home-based exercise) showed significant improvements in BBS (p-value=0.007), WOMAC (p-value=0.007), and TUG (p-value=0.027). Group B (clinic-based exercise) also showed significant improvements in BBS (p=0.005), WOMAC (p=0.005), and TUG (p=0.041). When comparing the two groups, significant differences were found in BBS (p=0.013) and WOMAC (p=0.039), but not in TUG (p=0.864) and VAS (p=0.908). The clinic-based exercise group demonstrated greater improvement, as indicated by higher pre and postintervention readings. Conclusion: This study concludes that both home-based and clinic-based exercises are effective in improving balance and physical function in geriatric individuals with knee OA. However, clinic-based exercise interventions showed greater improvement, as evidenced by higher pre and postintervention readings in the clinic-based exercise group.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.172
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCHSame topicPhysical Education and Training StudiesFrench-language works237,207