Comprehensive analysis of total knee arthroplasty kinematics and functional recovery: Exploring full-body gait deviations in patients with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Total Knee Arthroplasty has well-established success in relieving knee pain and improving function but patients do not reach functional levels of control groups after surgery and 20% of patients remain unsatisfied. To understand the different patient profiles and develop patient-specific approaches of care, functional phenotypes based on knee biomechanics during gait have been evaluated. To widen the understanding of patient's function, it seems crucial to consider the gait devieations at the whole body level. Thus, this study aims at 1) assessing the impact of knee OA on full-body gait mechanics, 2) assessing whether potential deviations persist one year after TKA surgery, and 3) their potential impact on satisfaction. To that end, clinical gait analysis was performed before and one year after surgery for 100 patients planned for unilateral primary TKA, along with 32 healthy participants as control group. Patients were clustered by applying K-means algorithms on full-body kinematic features of gait before surgery. The knee was excluded from classification to focus on full-body kinematics. Differences between groups, with controls, as well as before and after surgery were evaluated for patients reported outcome measures, kinematic features, and spatio-temporal parameters. Three functional groups were identified. One low-functioning cluster with mostly elderly women showing significant functional improvement one year after surgery, and two high-functioning clusters differentiated by pelvis tilt (anteversion vs. retroversion), sagittal knee alignment (varus vs. neutral), and knee flexion during stance phase (flexum vs. extended) that showed limited improvement one year after surgery. Satisfaction rates were similar among clusters and mental scores improved for all clusters. High functioning patients may benefit from TKA, mostly due to pain reduction, but may not see significant improvement of their function, with no clear impact on satisfaction rate. On the contrary, patients with important functional limitation are more likely to improve both pain and functional outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".