Comparison of pain, functional and psychological trajectories between total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasties: secondary analysis of a 6-month prospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) treats osteoarthritis in one knee compartment, while total knee arthroplasty (TKA) addresses all compartments. The debate focuses on UKA's advantages of quicker recovery and fewer complications versus TKA's lower long-term revision rates, emphasizing the need for thorough outcome evaluations. The aim of the present study is to describe and compare the pain, functional and psychological trajectories during a 6-month postoperative rehabilitation period between total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasties. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 115 participants who had undergone either TKA or UKA were recruited. Outcome measurements were performed at 1, 4, 12 and 24 weeks post-surgery. Measurements included pain intensity (Visual Analog Scale), range of motion, walking speed (4 m walking test), physical performance (30-s chair stand test), health functioning (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), pain catastrophizing (pain catastrophizing scale), fear of movement (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). A mixed-effects model was used to estimate the influence of type of surgery (either unicompartmental or total knee arthroplasty) to pain, function, and psychological trajectories. RESULTS: Both TKA and UKA groups showed significant improvements across the six-month rehabilitation period except for anxiety symptoms in the TKA group, and fear of movement and depression in the UKA group. Between group analysis revealed that in the acute phase UKA patients showed improved range of motion and TKA patients displayed faster walking speed but higher fear of movement. Overall, the type of surgery does not significantly influence the overall rehabilitation pain, functional and psychological trajectories. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in the acute phase, there are no differences in pain, functional and psychological trajectories throughout the six-month rehabilitation period. These results should be acknowledged to better inform patients and to improve patient education during the perioperative period. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03378440 (2017-12-18), retrospectively registered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".