The Effect of Contrast Bath Therapy and Knee Pad Device on Pain, Range of Motion, and Functional Disability in Patients With Osteoarthritis Knee: A Randomized Control Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objective A degenerative joint condition mostly affecting the weight-bearing joints is osteoarthritis (OA). The majority of the time, it involves the knee joint. Pain and stiffness are common in grade 1 and 2 OA. And that's the main reason people ask for help. Physiotherapy treatment can be helpful for symptomatic management of early OA. Along with exercises, contrast bath therapy (CBT) is a therapeutic alternative to medication to alleviate pain and stiffness in OA. Many studies have been done using the traditional water immersion CBT. However, there is a paucity of studies on contrast therapy given using a device. This study intends to find the effect of a knee pad device (KPD) on pain, range of motion, and functional disability in knee OA patients when compared with CBT. Methods About 60 patients having unilateral knee OA were selected and randomly divided into two groups: group A received CBT for 20 minutes, and group B was treated with a KPD for 20 minutes and the Otago exercise program was given in both groups for 30 minutes. Both groups received treatment for three sessions per week for two weeks. Outcome measures used for assessment at baseline and post-treatment were visual analog scale (VAS), knee range of motion, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scale, and distance covered in a two-minute walk test. Results Both the groups showed significant improvement post-treatment (p < 0.05). Group B showed more significant improvement when compared with group A. The enhancement in VAS (2.39, p < 0.020), range of motion (2.11, p < 0.039), WOMAC (2.09, p < 0.04), and two-minute walk test (2.03, p < 0.046) showed improvement in functional ability. Conclusion The findings of this study showed that both groups showed improvement following treatment, but that the use of a KPD in combination with strengthening and balance retraining is more efficient in reducing pain and enhancing quality of life in patients with grade 1 or 2 knee OA than conventional CBT.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".