Localized hyperthermia induced by microwave diathermy in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized placebo‐controlled double‐blind clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of hyperthermia on knee osteoarthritis (OA) in a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial. METHODS: Sixty-three patients with clinical evidence and radiographic confirmation of knee OA (Kellgren and Lawrence grades II and III) were randomized to either three 30-min sessions of hyperthermia per week for 4 weeks were administered using a 433.92 MHZ microwave generator or receive placebo treatment (machine not turned on) for same number of sessions. The Western Ontario McMaster Universities (WOMAC) questionnaire and the Timed Up and Go test (TUGT), a performance-based measure of function, were obtained at baseline (week 0), at the end of treatment (week 4), and at final follow-up (week 16). RESULTS: The treatment group showed a significant decrease in the overall WOMAC score and each of its components, and in the TGUG test between the beginning (week 0) and the end of treatment (week 4), as well as at final follow-up (week 16). In the placebo group, a significant fall was only visible in the pain subscore at week 4. However, the mean improvement was only 1 point and was lost at final follow-up (P=0.332). There was a significant difference in pain -7.4 pre-post (P<0.01), -8.1 pre-follow-up (P<0.01); stiffness -4.6 pre-post (P<0.01), -5.1 pre-follow-up (P<0.01); activities daily living (ADL) -30.9 pre-post (P<0.01), -33.2 pre-follow-up (P<0.01); and WOMAC total score -43 pre-post (P<0.01), -46.4 pre-follow-up (P<0.01); and in TGUG test -2.4 pre-post (P<0.01), -2.9 pre-follow-up (P<0.01) between the treatment and placebo group over the whole length of the trial. CONCLUSIONS: A 433.92 MHz microwave hyperthermia regimen showed beneficial effects in patients with moderate knee OA to reduce pain and to improve their physical function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".