The effects of rehabilitation exercises on shoulder joint range of motion pain and psychological status in elderly patients undergoing rotator muscle restoration surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to identify changes in shoulder joint range of motion, shoulder pain, and psychological status in elderly patients who underwent shoulder joint rotator cuff restoration surgery. Fifty elderly patients who underwent rotator muscle restoration surgery were asked to exercise for 40 minutes three times a week for 10 weeks, consisting of 5 minutes of warm-up, 30 minutes of main exercise, and 5 minutes of cool-down exercise. Rehabilitation exercises were conducted at Orthopedic A Hospital in Daegu. To verify the study, the Baseline Hi Res 360˚ISOM (STER) Goniometer 8ʺ and U.S.A. goniometer were used for joint range of motion, the Korean shortened McGill pain scale was used to test shoulder pain, and the mood state scale K-POMS was used to test psychological status. The measured results were compared between pre- and post-average values using SPSS (version 24.0). As a result of the study, the average angle in the range of motion test of the first shoulder joint increased. Second, the average value in the pain questionnaire decreased. Third, in the psychological state test, the average scores of depression, confusion, fatigue, and tension decreased, and the average score of vitality increased. The only difference was the average score of anger. In other words, it was found that 10 weeks of rehabilitation exercise had a positive effect on shoulder joint range of motion, shoulder pain, and psychological state. I hope that more convergent research will be conducted beyond the fields of rehabilitation, physical education, and psychology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".