MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7160986946 · doi:10.2196/87471

Adherence to a Digital Knee Rehabilitation Platform Among Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis and ACL Reconstruction in Hong Kong: Qualitative Study (Preprint)

2025· article· en· W7160986946 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nipuna Cooray, Stacie Powell, Mingqian Yu, Michael Tim Yun Ong, Julie Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisRehabilitationQualitative researchAnterior cruciate ligamentQuality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Exercise therapy is fundamental to rehabilitation for knee osteoarthritis and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, yet adherence to prescribed exercise typically declines once clinical supervision ends. Digital rehabilitation platforms offer a promising means of supporting sustained exercise adherence, but qualitative evidence on how patients experience these platforms in real-world clinical practice remains limited, particularly in non-Western health care contexts. Objective: This study aimed to explore how patients with different knee conditions experienced the Healthy Knees digital rehabilitation platform in Hong Kong and to identify the factors shaping their platform engagement and exercise adherence. Methods: A qualitative design was adopted using reflexive thematic analysis. Fifteen adults (9 with ACL, 6 with osteoarthritis) who had been prescribed the Healthy Knees web-based platform at Prince of Wales Hospital participated in semistructured, in-person interviews (30-45 min). Interviews were conducted in Cantonese or Mandarin, transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and analyzed inductively. Ethics approval was obtained from the Chinese University of Hong Kong and the University of New South Wales. Results: Participants were aged 21 to 79 years, with most being male (11/15). Younger participants were predominantly patients with postoperative ACL, while older participants were predominantly patients with preoperative osteoarthritis. Three interrelated themes were identified, collectively describing the fit between the platform and participants' contexts. Content fit captured the alignment between exercise content and rehabilitation needs; participants across both groups perceived substantial overlap with existing physiotherapy, and content was often mismatched to their recovery stage. Motivational fit captured the alignment between platform support features and motivational needs; pain functioned as both a driver and a deterrent to exercise, and participants ranged from highly self-directed to reliant on external scaffolding, not following a simple age pattern. Access fit captured the alignment between the platform's delivery mechanism and participants' technological circumstances; QR code-dependent access, absence of a dedicated mobile app, and display issues created friction that led several participants to migrate to alternative resources, maintaining exercise adherence while abandoning platform engagement. Conclusions: Adherence to digital knee rehabilitation was shaped by the degree of fit between the platform and users' contexts across content, motivational, and access dimensions. When access fit failed, participants often substituted alternative exercise resources rather than ceasing exercise entirely, highlighting a distinction between platform engagement and exercise adherence. As the sample's clinical and demographic characteristics were closely linked, these findings should not be interpreted as diagnostic comparisons between ACL and osteoarthritis populations but as patterns shaped by the recovery phase and age. These findings suggest that digital rehabilitation platforms should incorporate adaptive content aligned with the recovery stage, integrated feedback mechanisms, and reduced access friction to sustain platform engagement within an ecosystem of competing alternatives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive TechnologiesSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207