ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2025
Feasibility of prehabilitation for patients awaiting total knee arthroplasty; a pilot study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hypobaric unilateral spinal anesthesia with multimodal analgesia enhances recovery in total knee arthroplasty.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To examine the feasibility of conducting a preoperative home-based prehabilitation program for total knee arthroplasty patients at risk for delayed in-hospital recovery, and to explore the pre- and postoperative impact of this program. Design: A retrospective cohort study with matched controls, enabling subgroup analyses. Setting: Home-based. Subjects: Patients awaiting primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty between 2019 and 2020, were compared with matched historic cases from 2016 to 2017. Matching criteria were scoring ≤17 points on the De Morton Mobility Index and >12.5 s on the timed-up-and-go test. Intervention: Supervised home-based prehabilitation program versus no prehabilitation. Outcomes: Feasibility, determined by recruitment rate, adherence, and safety of the program. Preoperative impact, assessed for the intervention group by differences in mean values for aerobic capacity, muscle strength and functional mobility between the first and last sessions. Postoperative impact was defined as the time needed to achieve in-hospital independence of physical function and was measured by the differences in mean values between the intervention and control groups. Results: Recruitment rate was 71 %; adherence and drop-out rates were 88 % and 12 % respectively. No adverse events were reported. Preoperatively, the intervention group showed significant improvements in aerobic capacity on the 2-min walking test (84.29 m-98.06 m; p = 0.007) and 2-min step test (40.35 steps to 52.95 steps; p = 0.014), muscle strength on the 30 s chair stand test (7.3 stands to 10.1 stands; p = 0.002), and functional mobility as seen in the timed-up-and-go-test (19.52 s-15.85 s; p = 0.031). Postoperatively, the intervention group achieved in-hospital independence of physical function earlier (mean rank 16.11) than the control group (mean rank 24.89; p=<0.01). Conclusions: It is feasible to conduct a prehabilitation program 4-6 weeks preoperatively, for high-risk patients awaiting total knee arthroplasty. Additionally, the program appears to have a positive impact on physical fitness both pre- and postoperatively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.