Short-Term Impact of Low-Intensity Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction on Mild Knee Osteoarthritis in Older Adults: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This pilot study aimed to investigate the immediate impact of low-intensity exercises with blood flow restriction (BFR) on older adults with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Fifteen patients with KOA who were over 50 years old, participated and underwent low-intensity resistance knee exercises at 30% of their one-repetition maximum with BFR three times/week for two weeks. Pre- and post-exercise assessments included pain levels, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, isokinetic knee strength, lower extremity muscle volume (via leg circumference and muscle thickness), functional performance tests (timed up-and-go [TUG] and sit-to-stand [STS]), skeletal muscle index (SMI) using bioelectrical impedance analysis, and handgrip strength (HGS). Post-exercise, there was a significant reduction in pain. WOMAC scores showed significant improvements across all three domains: pain, stiffness, and physical function. In the TUG and STS tests, completion times were significantly reduced. Thigh and calf circumferences, as well as thigh muscle thickness significantly increased after exercise. Post-exercise SMI and HGS also significantly increased. However, isokinetic knee strength did not show significant changes. In conclusion, low-intensity BFR exercises provide immediate benefits in symptoms and physical performance for patients with KOA, potentially inducing local and systemic muscle mass increase, even after a short-term intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".