MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387731782 · doi:10.1093/jhps/hnad023

Postoperative weight-bearing restrictions and rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4387731782 on OpenAlex
Riley Hemstock, Drew Mulhall, Janine Didyk, Dan Ogborn, Devin B. Lemmex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hip Preservation Surgery · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsPan Am ClinicUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemoroacetabular impingementMedicinePromWeight-bearingHip arthroscopyRehabilitationPhysical therapyMEDLINEArthroscopyMeta-analysisEvidence-based medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite recent increased interest in hip arthroscopy for the management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), there is little evidence to guide weight-bearing recommendations and rehabilitation postoperatively. The primary objective of this study was to determine if sufficient evidence exists to recommend specific weight-bearing restrictions postoperatively. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021247741). PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase were searched on 3 March 2023 for Level I-IV studies including patients over the age of 18 years, with a minimum 1-year follow-up and reporting of a weight-bearing status, a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) and a clinical outcome. Meta-analysis was precluded due to heterogeneity in the included studies, and a descriptive analysis was undertaken. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed with the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Twenty-four studies including 2231 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for treatment of FAI were included (follow-up interval 33.2 ± 24.7 months). Most articles (62.5%) were case series. There were seven terms describing weight-bearing recommendations, with 83% being some variation of 'partial weight-bearing'. Eight PROMs were reported, with 83% using the modified Harris Hip Score and 87.5% of studies reporting reoperation rates. Only 75% of studies reported rehabilitation protocols. The average MINORS score was 11.07 ± 1.10 out of 16 for non-comparative studies and 18.22 ± 1.48 out of 24 for comparative studies. The reporting of weight-bearing status, clinical outcomes, PROMs and rehabilitation parameters remains poor. At present, sufficient comparative evidence does not exist to make specific weight-bearing recommendation postoperatively.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.293 · 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