Effectiveness of proprioceptive integration on sensory-specific balance training in osteoarthritis: a randomized control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic degenerative condition and one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders, primarily affecting the knee joint. It is characterized by progressive joint deterioration, leading to pain, stiffness, and functional impairment. Proprioceptive training has emerged as a therapeutic approach to enhance joint position sense and address balance deficits in OA patients. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of sensory-specific balance training with proprioceptive integration compared to conventional occupational therapy in improving balance, proprioception, and functional outcomes in individuals with knee OA. Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted at a College of Occupational Therapy, enrolling 30 participants diagnosed with knee OA. The participants were randomly assigned to either a control group receiving standard occupational therapy sessions or an experimental group undergoing proprioceptive integration with sensory-specific balance exercises. Outcome measures included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and the adult sensory profile, which were assessed before and after the intervention. Results: The experimental group significantly improved WOMAC scores, particularly in pain, stiffness, and physical function domains. Additionally, BBS and proprioception outcomes showed greater enhancement in the experimental group compared to the control group, which exhibited minimal changes with conventional therapy. Conclusion: Proprioceptive integration, particularly sensory-specific balance training, is an effective intervention for enhancing balance, proprioception, and functional outcomes in knee OA patients. It is a valuable complement to traditional therapies and can potentially improve affected individuals’ quality of life and overall physical functioning.
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 | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| 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".