Preoperative rehabilitation and education program for surgery (PREPS): A pilot randomized control trial protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We designed a program for prehabilitation and education before a shoulder replacement (PREPS) that is based on reviews of relevant literature, and is co-designed with preferences of patients recruited from the wait list for a shoulder replacement, and a transdisciplinary healthcare sample. The content and format was integrated in a comprehensive, patient-centered program combining exercise, preparedness for surgery, motivational interviewing, and pain management principles. This patient-centered program has the potential to improve postoperative pain, function, and patient-oriented outcomes, decrease postoperative opioid use and short- and long-term healthcare costs. This pilot randomized controlled trial will evaluate feasibility and satisfaction with our program for individuals undergoing a shoulder replacement. Methods: = 90) undergoing a shoulder replacement will be randomized into (1) a 6-week self-directed online pre-rehab and education program, (2) a 6-week online pre-rehab and education program with a therapist to monitor progression of PREPS or (3) a standard of care group. The PREPS program intervention groups will be delivered virtually with an online program of modules and a written handbook. Feasibility outcomes include recruitment rate, adherence, content acceptability, study acceptability, outcome measure completion rates and treatment fidelity. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline and 1 day before surgery, then post-operatively at 6 weeks and 3,6 and 12 months. Discussion: The proposed project will include the feasibility testing of a prehabilitation and education program with potential to improve surgical outcomes for shoulder replacement patients. Results of this study will provide the foundation for a future fully powered multicenter trial. Trial Registration: NCT05965986.
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 | 0.027 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.005 |
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".