MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388934048 · doi:10.1186/s13102-023-00772-7

Effect of adding hip exercises to general rehabilitation treatment of knee osteoarthritis on patients’ physical functions: a randomized clinical trial

2023· article· en· W4388934048 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jie Qiu, Tiantian Zhou, Huihong Jin, Yujian Pan, Tingting Qian, Chuan Xue, Wen Xia, Haitao Shi, Bingchen An

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisWOMACPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialRehabilitationTimed Up and Go testPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryBalance (ability)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hip adductor and abductor strength were both reduced in KOA patients. But to date, most of the researches have only focused on quadriceps combined with hip abductor strengthening versus quadriceps strengthening. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of adding hip abductor and adductor strengthening to quadriceps strengthening on lower limb strength, knee pain and physical function in patients with medial compartmental knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: In this study, 42 participants, were randomly divided into two groups: the general treatment group (GT group) and the added-hip-exercise group (AH group). All participants were given a general rehabilitation treatment. The AH group performed hip abductor and adductor strengthening in addition to the general rehabilitation treatment. Knee and hip muscle strength, Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST), the Timed Up and Go Test (TUGT), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were assessed at baseline and 6 weeks. A two-sided 2-sample unpaired t test was performed to compare the difference in mean change scores between AH and GT groups. RESULTS: Finally, 36 participants completed the study: both groups consist of 18 participants. In the per-protocol analysis, the AH group had a greater improvement in knee extension strength (mean changes, 7.84 versus 36.48; P < 0.001) and hip abduction strength (mean changes, 5.05 versus 26.62; P = 0.001) than the control group. Similarly, the AH group had a greater improvement in the FTSST time (mean changes, 0.40 s versus 3.57 s; P < 0.001) and the TUFT time (mean changes, 0.18 s versus 1.67 s; P = 0.002) than the GH group. No statistical difference was found in the change of WOMAC pain scores and NRS between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with knee OA in the AH group had superior muscle strength, symptoms and daily activity performance at the 6th week than those in the GT group. And adding hip exercises could expedite improvement of pain at the 2th week, but not at the 6th week. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration numbers and date of registration: ChiCTR-IOR-16009124, Registered 30 August 2016.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Sports Science Medicine and RehabilitationSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207