Face-to-face and telerehabilitation delivery of circuit training have similar benefits and acceptability in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomised trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
QUESTION: Is periodised circuit training delivered via a telerehabilitation model of care as effective as the same training applied face-to-face for improving pain intensity, physical function, muscle strength, pain catastrophising, body composition, intermuscular adipose tissue and muscle architecture in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA)? DESIGN: Randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessors and intention-to-treat analysis. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred adults aged ≥ 40 years with knee OA and pain for ≥ 3 months, with current pain ≥ 40 mm on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). INTERVENTION: The experimental group received 14 weeks of circuit training delivered via telerehabilitation using video recordings, followed by periodic phone calls in order to motivate and instruct participants. The control group received the same circuit training program in a face-to-face format. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were pain VAS and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical function subscale, measured at 14 weeks. Secondary outcomes included objective physical function, strength, pain catastrophising and morphological measures (muscle architecture and thigh and body composition). Outcomes were measured at 14 and 26 weeks. RESULTS: Periodised circuit training delivered via telerehabilitation had equivalent effects to face-to-face delivery for pain intensity, physical function, muscle strength, pain catastrophising, thigh composition, intermuscular adipose tissue and muscle architecture. Whole body composition did not change appreciably in either group. Adherence to the training was excellent and participants in each group reported good perceptions of their randomised intervention. CONCLUSION: A periodised circuit training protocol can be delivered to people with knee OA in their own homes, using available technology while maintaining high levels of acceptability. More importantly, telerehabilitation appears to cause non-inferior physical and functional outcomes to face-to-face rehabilitation programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: RBR-662hn2.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".