ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Effectiveness of an intelligent weight-bearing rehabilitation robot in enhancing recovery following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Orthopedic surgery patients frequently delay early rehabilitation due to postoperative discomfort. This is especially true for younger patients with anterior cruciate ligament injuries who are eager to return to sports after discharge. Despite the recognized benefits of early rehabilitation, a standardized protocol for determining safe weight-bearing timelines post-ACL reconstruction is lacking. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an Intelligent Weight-Bearing Rehabilitation Robot in improving recovery outcomes for these patients. Design: A retrospective cohort study comparing outcomes between individuals who received the intervention and those in the control group. Methods: Ninety-two patients who underwent ACL reconstruction were chosen as subjects and separated into two groups: control and intervention, each with 46 patients, in the order of hospital admission. The control group got standard rehabilitation training, whereas the intervention group received rehabilitation training using the Intelligent Weight-Bearing Rehabilitation Robot. The intervention effects of both groups were compared. Results: The intervention group demonstrated significant improvements in knee joint function post-surgery compared to the control group. The mean range of motion (ROM) in the experimental group increased from 41.63 ± 5.97° pre-intervention to 55.89 ± 5.13° post-intervention, while the control group's ROM improved from 40.65 ± 3.43° to 49.78 ± 5.27° ( Conclusion: Utilizing the intelligent weight-bearing robot in post-ACL reconstruction rehabilitation significantly improves knee function, reduces discomfort, and shortens hospital stay, highlighting the importance of innovation in medical rehabilitation.
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.