Enhancing postural stability in knee osteoarthritis patients through targeted training: a randomized control trial using the WOMAC assessment tool
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common joint condition in older adults that causes pain, disability, and reduced quality of life. Although there is no known cure for KOA, exercise therapy is strongly recommended as a primary non-drug treatment. This study aimed to assess the effect of combining proprioceptive training with physical therapy on pain, balance, and osteoarthritis symptom severity in patients with KOA. METHODS: A total of 34 patients with primary KOA (aged 50-65) were assigned to either intervention or control groups (n = 17 each). The intervention group received conventional physical therapy combined with proprioceptive training for 3 days a week for 8 weeks. The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and Modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire were administered before and after 8 weeks intervention. RESULTS: After the intervention, the TUG and TSK scores improved significantly more in the intervention group than in the control group (p < 0.05). Significant differences were also observed in Numerical Rating Scale and WOMAC scores (pain, stiffness, function, and total WOMAC scores). CONCLUSION: The integration of proprioceptive training with physical therapy resulted in significant improvements in balance, reduced fall risk, and decreased movement-related fear after 8 weeks of intervention.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".