ArticleCureus2020
Time and Repetitions Needed to Train Patients with Knee Pain on a Home Exercise Program: Are Learning Styles Important?
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study was designed to identify the amount of time and number of repetitions needed to explain a home exercise program recommended for most of our patients, as well as to gauge how many items patients managed to remember at their 15-day follow-up. We also considered whether the learning method had any effect on these results. Methods Sixty-two patients with mechanical knee pain who were admitted to our clinic were included in this study. Patients were categorized into the following three groups: group 1 with a dominant physical learning style, group 2 with a dominant auditory learning style, and group 3 with a dominant visual learning style. Heel slide, quadriceps isometric, quadriceps stretching, adductor isometric, abductor isometric, and quadriceps isotonic exercises were explained and demonstrated to all patients by the same physiotherapist, and the required time (in seconds) and repeats of exercises until the patients learned them were recorded. Remembered/forgotten exercises at the follow-up, which occurred 15 days later, were identified. Results A statistically significant difference was observed between groups in terms of how many seconds were needed for learning the quadriceps isometric exercises (p: 0.042). In the inter-group comparison, the difference was significant when groups 2 and 3 were compared (p: 0.046). There was a significant difference between groups in terms of how many repeats were needed for learning heel sliding (p: 0.000). Moreover, there was a significant difference between group 3 and groups 1 and 2 in the inter-group comparison (p: 0.000, p: 0.000). There was also a significant difference between groups in terms of recalling the adductor isometric exercises. Patients in group 2 were able to fully recall all these exercises. Conclusion It was found that the quadriceps isometric, heel slide, and adductor isometric exercises were more quickly learned, while the quadriceps stretching exercise was forgotten. We concluded that learning style is not highly important in exercise learning or recall.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.