Effectiveness of Joint Mobilization with Transcutaneous Nerve Stimulation for relieving pain and improving functional mobility on chronic osteoarthritis knee patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Chronic knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a major cause of joint pain and mobility limitation among older adults. Physiotherapy interventions, such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and joint mobilization, are commonly used to manage symptoms non-pharmacologically. Objective: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of joint mobilization combined with TENS in relieving pain and improving functional mobility in individuals with chronic knee OA. Methodology: A total of 24 participants were recruited and assigned into two groups. Group A received joint mobilization combined with TENS, while Group B received TENS alone. The intervention was conducted over four weeks, with treatments provided twice weekly. Pain intensity was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and functional mobility was measured with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), both before and after the intervention. Result: The results showed a significant reduction in pain and improvement in functional mobility for both groups (P<.01). The results showed a significant difference in pain level between both groups (P=.03), but no significant difference in functional mobility between both groups (P=.46). Conclusion: These findings suggest that joint mobilization, when used together with TENS, may enhance pain management in patients with chronic knee OA. Although functional improvements were not significant within the short intervention period, the combined approach may prepare patients for more active rehabilitation in later stages. Further research with longer durations and larger sample sizes is recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".