Comparison of muscle tightness between knees in individuals with unilateral osteoarthritis and its relationship with pain and function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unilateral osteoarthritis (OA) affects single knees and presents a unique scenario where individuals experience varying degrees of symptoms between their affected and unaffected knees. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate differences in muscle tightness between symptomatic and asymptomatic knees in individuals with unilateral knee OA while exploring the interplay among pain, functionality, and muscle tightness. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, thirty knee OA patients underwent assessments for hamstring (Active Knee Extension, Straight Leg Raise), iliotibial band (Ober Test), and quadriceps tightness (Modified Thomas Test). Pain intensity was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and functional limitations were evaluated via the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). RESULTS: A negative correlation was observed between participants' pain and AKE (p= 0.004, r=-0.515), ASLR (p= 0.27, r=-0.403), Ober (p= 0.010, r=-0.461) values. However, no significant correlation was found with the Modified Thomas value (p= 0.204, r=-0.239). There was also a negative correlation between participants' WOMAC scores and AKE (p= 0.019, r=-0.427), OBER (p= 0.004, r=-0.510), and Modified Thomas (p= 0.022, r=-0.416) values, while ASLR (p= 0.286, r=-0.202) values showed no significant correlation. Comparisons between AKE, Ober, and Modified Thomas values showed higher values in asymptomatic extremities (AKE: p= 0.025, Ober: p= 0.021, Modified Thomas: p= 0.030). CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes the significance of muscle tightness in the symptomatic extremities of individuals with unilateral knee OA. The results indicate that increased muscle tightness makes pain worse and limits movement. It's crucial for healthcare providers treating OA to focus on improving muscle flexibility, reducing pain, and enhancing overall function.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".