MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409741664 · doi:10.1111/nhs.70120

Evaluating the Impact of a Nursing‐Led Neuromuscular Exercise Program on Pain, Range of Motion, and Quality of Life in Knee Osteoarthritis Patients: A Quasi‐Experimental Approach

2025· article· en· W4409741664 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shahera Shehata Harby, Mona Metwally El‐Sayed, Ayman Mohamed El‐Ashry, Soheir Mohamed Weheida, Mervat Abdel Hamid Hawash, El Saied Abd El Hamid El Sayed Salem, Mona Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing and Health Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisRange of motionPhysical therapyMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Physical medicine and rehabilitationIntervention (counseling)Knee JointKnee painOrthopedic surgerySurgeryNursingAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Knee osteoarthritis is a leading cause of pain and functional limitation in adults. Neuromuscular exercise (NEMEX) programs are designed to improve sensorimotor control and functional joint stabilization. This study evaluated the effects of a NEMEX program on pain, range of motion, and quality of life in knee osteoarthritis patients. A repeated measure quasi‐experimental study with a control group was conducted at an outpatient orthopedic clinic. Sixty adult knee osteoarthritis patients were conveniently sampled, with 30 in the intervention group receiving the NEMEX program and 30 in the control group. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, post‐intervention, and 2‐month follow‐up using the Knee Range of Motion Assessment, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and Knee Osteoarthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire. The general linear model (GLM) showed the intervention group had significant improvements in knee flexion ( F = 44.106, η 2 = 0.432), extension ( F = 43.972, η 2 = 0.431), and total range of motion ( F = 69.411, η 2 = 0.545) compared to controls ( p < 0.001). Pain scores improved more in the intervention group ( F = 201.037, η 2 = 0.776). The intervention group also improved stiffness ( F = 77.547, η 2 = 0.572) and physical function ( F = 127.420, η 2 = 0.687). Physical activities ( F = 164.155, η 2 = 0.739) and mental health ( F = 76.279, η 2 = 0.568) showed significant group differences, but social functioning had a more negligible effect ( F = 25.164, η 2 = 0.303). These findings indicate that the NEMEX program effectively improved the range of motion, reduced pain, and enhanced quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis. However, the effect on social functioning was more minor. The program appears to have positively impacted the physical and psychosocial aspects of the participants' health and well‐being. These findings support incorporating NEMEX into Knee osteoarthritis rehabilitation to enhance functionality, lower discomfort, improve patient outcomes, and improve the general QOL for those managing this illness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing and Health SciencesSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207