## 3 Results  
Sixty (50%) patients underwent THA, of whom 30 (50%) and 30 (50%) underwent CBR and HBR, respectively. Adherence to, and compliance with HBR and CBR was checked with the physiotherapist during the study, and found to be 100%. The characteristics of the study population are summarized in Table 1.  
Overall, numbers of female patients were 38 (63.3%) and 41 (68.3%) in the THA and TKA groups, respectively, and overall mean age was 70.7 \(\pm\) 8.8 and 68.9 \(\pm\) 8.7 years in the TKA and THA groups, respectively. Table 2 presents functional outcomes at t3, as well as complications and minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs). The significance of differences between preoperative and postoperative values and between the groups, was assessed using two-tailed paired- and unpaired-sample Student's \(t\)-tests. Table 3 shows the differences among IADL, VAS, and VHS scores at t0, t1, t2, and t3 in the HBR and CBR groups for patients who underwent THA. The comparisons between the scores were performed using paired \(t\)-tests, with a \(p\)-value less than 0.05 being considered significant. A statistically significant recovery was found in terms of VAS and VHS in the HBR and CBR groups (all \(p<0.001\)). No differences were found at t0 and t3 between the HBR and CBR groups in terms of IADLs, VAS, and VHS. Table 4 shows the differences among IADL, VAS, and WOMAC scores at t0, t1, t2, and t3 in the HBR and CBR groups for patients who underwent TKA. Comparisons between scores were obtained using paired \(t\)-tests, with \(p\)-values lower than 0.05 being considered significant. A statistically significant recovery was found in terms of VAS and WOMAC in the HBR and CBR groups (all \(p<0.001\)). No differences were found at t0 and t3 between HBR and CBR groups in terms of IADLs, VAS, and WOMAC. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline  & **TKA HBR** & **TKA CBR** & \(p\)**-Value** & **THA HBR** & **THA CBR** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline
**Age** & 70.6 \(\pm\) 9 & 70.8 \(\pm\) 8.6 & 0.93 & 70.3 \(\pm\) 9.15 & 67.5 \(\pm\) 8.2 & 0.217 \\ \hline
**Gender** & & & & & \\ \hline Male & 13 (43.4\%) & 6 (20\%) & & 12 (40\%) & 10 (33.3\%) & 0.59 \\ \hline Female & 17 (56.6\%) & 24 (80\%) & & 18 (60\%) & 20 (66.7\%) & \\ \hline
**Side** & & & & & \\ \hline Right & 14 (46.6\%) & 14 (46.6\%) & 1 & 17 (56.6\%) & 10 (33.3\%) & 0.06 \\ \hline Left & 16 (53.4\%) & 16 (53.4\%) & & 13 (43.4\%) & 20 (66.7\%) & \\ \hline \end{tabular}  
TKA—total knee arthroplasty; THA—total hip arthroplasty; HBR—home-based rehabilitation; CBR—clinic-based rehabilitation.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Characteristics of the patients. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline  & **Functional Outcomes** & **Difference t0–t3** & **MCIDs** & **Complications** \\ \hline HBR—THA & VAS: t0 = 7.4, t3 = 1.3 & VAS = 6.1 & & No \\  & VHS: t0 = 33.9, t3 = 76.5 & VHS = 42.6 & & VAS = 2.9 \\ \hline CBR—THA & VAS: t0 = 6.7, t3 = 1.6 & VAS = 5.1 & & VHS = 10 \\  & VHS: t0 = 35.3, t3 = 73.8 & VHS = 38.3 & & No \\ \hline HBR—TKA & VAS: t0 = 7.1, t3 = 2.2 & VAS = 4.9 & & \\  & WOMAC: t0 = 45.2, t3 = 16 & WOMAC = 29.2 & & 1 wound dehiscence \\ \hline CBR—TKA & VAS: t0 = 7.5, t3 = 2.4 & VAS = 5.1 & & WOMAC = 10 \\  & WOMAC: t0 = 49.7, t3 = 18 & WOMAC = 31.7 & & 1 capsule rupture \\ \hline \end{tabular}  
MCIDs—minimum clinically important differences; HBR—home-based rehabilitation; THA—total hip arthroplasty; CBR—clinic-based rehabilitation; TKA—total knee arthroplasty; VAS—visual analogue scale; VHS—VHS—Vil Hip Score.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Outcomes of HBR and CBR groups. Changes with surgery were compared with MCIDs. For reference values of MCID, previously published data for each outcome were used: VAS MCID = 2.9 [23]; WOMAC MCID = 10 [24]; and VHS = 10 [25]. All patients were beyond the MCID in all cases. Patient satisfaction was assessed, with 100% of the patients declaring that they were satisfied and would undergo the same operation again.