Comparing The Effectiveness of Maitland Mobilization, Proprioceptive Exercise and Conventional Therapy on Pain, Functional Ability and Proprioception in Patients with Primary Osteoarthritis Knee – A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disorder affecting the weight bearing area of the joints and the leading cause of pain and disability in world wide. Most common in the middle and elderly population and tends to worsen with age if not treated. This study is to compare the effectiveness of Maitland mobilization, proprioceptive exercise and conventional therapy on pain, functional ability and proprioception in patients with primary OA knee. Methods: It was a single blinded randomized controlled trial.29 individuals with Osteoarthritis knee with Kellgren Grade II and III, age group ranging from 40 -60 years were participated. Based on the selection criteria individuals were randomly assigned using computer software generator into three groups by simple random sampling method. Group A received Maitland mobilization, Group B received proprioceptive exercise and Group C received conventional therapy for 3 days in a week for 4 weeks. After 4 weeks the pain proprioception and functional ability were evaluated using Visual Analogue Scale, modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities and Active angle reproduction test. Conclusion: Maitland mobilization is more beneficial compared to proprioceptive exercise and Conventional therapy on pain and proprioception. Key words: Maitland mobilization, Osteoarthritis, Proprioception, Range of motion, Visual Analogue Scale
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 | 0.023 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".