The Effect of Foot Reflexology on Pain and Kinesiophobia in Patients Following Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonpharmacological methods are used in the management of pain and kinesiophobia following total knee arthroplasty. The aim of this double-blind randomized controlled trial was to examine the effect of foot reflexology on pain and kinesiophobia in patients following total knee arthroplasty. A total of 40 patients (20 in the control group and 20 in the intervention group) were randomly assigned to either of two groups for the study. The intervention group was exposed to foot reflexology. Postoperative Visual Analog Scale scores decreased faster in the intervention group compared to the control group (F = 80.417; p < .001; η2 = 0.685). The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores decreased in the intervention group over time, while they increased in the control group (p < .05). While a gradual increase was observed in the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia scores in the control group, there was a decrease in the intervention group (F = 84.860; p < .001; η2 = 0.696). The amount of analgesics used was lower in the intervention group (p < .05). Foot reflexology can be applied as an effective and safe method to manage pain and kinesiophobia in total knee arthroplasty patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".