ArticleCurrent health sciences journal
Assessment and Rehabilitation in Sarcopenic Patients.
Article in Current health sciences journal. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sarcopenia is a degenerative disorder that particularly affects older people and is defined by a pathological decrease in muscle strength. This disease represents one of the topics of great interest in the medical world of the last two decades. In our study, we tried to underline the importance of an adapted recovery program based on physical exercise for regaining clinical and functional status in patients with age-related sarcopenia. No nutritional intervention was applied. We performed our rehabilitation program in accordance with present international recommendations for sarcopenia. After complete assessment, our patients were randomised into two groups: G1 (Lot 1=25 patients) and G2 (Lot 2=15 patients). G1 patients were compliant with kinetic training, and performed all rehabilitation measures, and G2 patients accepted rehabilitation program without kinetic exercises. Patients assessment (lab tests, gait analysis, VAS and the Clinical Frailty Scale) was made on two levels-first (T1-inpatient assessment), and after 6 months (T2-outpatient assessment). The rehabilitation program based on the kinetic program brought positive improvements in physical performance and locomotion (gait speed and walking cadence) in sarcopenic patients.
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.