Optimizing orthopedic care: Insights from a comprehensive analysis of day case total knee replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Total knee replacement (TKR) is a well-established intervention for managing knee osteoarthritis, traditionally conducted as an inpatient procedure. The evolution of medical practices has prompted exploration into the feasibility and outcomes of day case total knee replacement. This study aims to comprehensively investigate the demographic characteristics, procedural details, and postoperative outcomes associated with day case total knee replacement, providing insights into its safety, efficacy, and patient experience. A retrospective observational design was employed, involving patients who underwent a day case total knee replacement at a tertiary care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Data included patient demographics, baseline characteristics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were used to assess outcomes. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, paired t-tests, and categorical data presentations. The study comprised eight patients undergoing day case TKR. The majority were female (87.5%), with a mean age of 59.38 years (SD = 8.26). Baseline characteristics indicated a mean BMI of 27.81 kg/m2 (SD = 4.56). Anesthesia distribution revealed 62.5% receiving spinal and 37.5% receiving general anesthesia. Postoperative outcomes demonstrated significant improvements in WOMAC and SF-36 scores at six weeks and three months. Pain and nausea/vomiting analyses revealed effective management strategies. This study provides comprehensive insights into the demographics, procedural intricacies, and short-term outcomes of day case total knee replacement. The findings suggest that day case total knee replacement is associated with favorable postoperative outcomes, supporting its feasibility and safety.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".