Observational studyJournal of rehabilitation medicine2025
Effect of baseline values on inpatient rehabilitation outcomes after total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 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.
- Commentary on "Effect of baseline values on inpatient rehabilitation outcomes after total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective observational study".Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare inpatient rehabilitation outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between groups with different baseline scores.
designA retrospective observational study. SUBJECTS: Patients with knee osteoarthritis who have previously undergone unilateral TKA.
methodsPatients participated in 3-week inpatient rehabilitation following TKA and were assessed for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which included the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level Version (EQ-5D-5L), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Furthermore, mobility scores for the range of motion (ROM) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test were recorded at the beginning and the end of rehabilitation. Patients were divided into quartile groups based on their initial examination scores.
results329 patients were enrolled in the study. The study population consisted mostly of female patients (63.8% vs 36.2%) with a mean age of 68.25 (SD 9.24) years. The personalized 21-day in rehabilitation programme was safe for all patients and had no dropouts. Patients with better PROMs scores at T1 did not have the same potential for improvement in PROMs but showed effective improvement in mobility (η² = 0.103 for changes in the WOMAC vs η²=0.502 for changes in the TUG test).
conclusionRegardless of the baseline scores, all patients presented significant improvements in both subjective and objective measures. Age and baseline PROMs or mobility scores did not have a significant effect on score development.
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.