Favourable mid-term isokinetic strength after primary THA combined with a modified enhanced recovery after surgery concept (ERAS) in a single blinded randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Muscular deficits as part of severe osteoarthritis of the hip may persist for up to two years following total hip arthroplasty (THA). No study has evaluated the mid-term benefit of a modified enhanced-recovery-after-surgery (ERAS) concept on muscular strength of the hip in detail thus far. We (1) investigated if a modified ERAS-concept for primary THA improves the mid-term rehabilitation of muscular strength and (2) compared the clinical outcome using validated clinical scores. Methods In a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial we compared patients receiving primary THA with a modified ERAS concept (n = 12, ERAS-group) and such receiving conventional THA (n = 12, non-ERAS) at three months and one year postoperatively. For assessment of isokinetic muscular strength, a Biodex-Dynamometer was used (peak-torque, total-work, power). The clinical outcome was evaluated by using clinical scores (Patient-Related-Outcome-Measures (PROMs), WOMAC-index (Western-Ontario-and-McMaster-Universities-Osteoarthritis-Index), HHS (Harris-Hip-Score) and EQ-5D-3L-score. Results Three-months postoperatively, isokinetic strength (peak-torque, total-work, power) and active range of motion was significantly better in the modified ERAS group. One year postoperatively, the total work for flexion was significantly higher than in the Non-ERAS group, whilst peak-torque and power did not show significant differences. Evaluation of clinical scores revealed excellent results at both time points in both groups. However, we could not detect any significant differences between both groups in respect of the clinical outcome. Conclusion With regard to muscular strength, this study supports the implementation of an ERAS concept for primary THA. The combination with a modified ERAS concept lead to faster rehabilitation for up to one-year postoperatively, reflected by significant higher muscular strength (peak-torque, total-work, power). Possibly, because common scores are not sensitive enough, the results are not reflected in the clinical outcome. Further larger randomized controlled trials are necessary for long-term evaluation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".