Effect of adding retro-walking or whole-body vibration in the routine physiotherapy program on knee functional disability in patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent degenerative joint disease with a significant global healthcare burden. Over 70% of the population experiences symptomatic knee OA. Purpose: This study compared the efficacy of adding retro-walking (RW) or whole-body vibration (WBV) on knee functional disability in individuals with chronic grade III knee OA. Methods: A randomized controlled trial enrolled 45 participants diagnosed with chronic grade III knee OA, aged 40-55 years. Participants were randomly assigned into three groups (n=15/group): Group A: Routine physiotherapy program (straight leg raise, isometric quadriceps, isometric hip adduction, terminal knee extension, semi-squat, and leg press). Group B: Routine physiotherapy program, in addition to the RW program. Group C: Routine physiotherapy program and WBV training. Knee functional disability was assessed using the Arabic version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (ArWOMAC) at baseline and after six weeks. Results: All groups showed significant improvements in knee function (pain, stiffness, physical function) (p < 0.05) after six weeks compared to baseline. However, no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) were noticed between the groups in any subscales or the total ArWOMAC scores post-treatment. Conclusion: Adding RW or WBV to the routine physiotherapy program produces a similar improvement in knee function as the routine physiotherapy program. So, when routine physiotherapy is used, either adding RW or WBV will not produce better results for improving knee function in individuals with chronic grade III knee OA.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".