Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections in the Treatment of Chronic Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tendinopathy (RCT) is a significant source of disability and loss of work. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been suggested to be beneficial in the treatment of RCT. PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of PRP injections on pain and shoulder functions in patients with chronic RCT. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 40 patients, 18 to 70 years of age, with (1) a history of shoulder pain for >3 months during overhead-throwing activities, (2) MRI findings of RCT or partial tendon ruptures, and (3) a minimum 50% reduction in shoulder pain with subacromial injections of an anesthetic were included in this placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized clinical trial. Patients were randomized into a PRP group (n = 20) or placebo group (n = 20). Patients received an ultrasound-guided injection into the subacromial space that contained either 5 mL of PRP prepared from autologous venous blood or 5 mL of saline solution. All patients underwent a 6-week standard exercise program. Outcome measures (Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index [WORC], Shoulder Pain and Disability Index [SPADI], 100-mm visual analog scale [VAS] of shoulder pain with the Neer test, and shoulder range of motion) were assessed at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 weeks and 1 year after injection. RESULTS: Comparison of the patients revealed no significant difference between the groups in WORC, SPADI, and VAS scores at 1-year follow-up (P = .174, P = .314, and P = .904, respectively). Similar results were found at other assessment points. Within each group, the WORC, SPADI, and VAS scores showed significant improvements compared with baseline at all time points (P < .001). In the range of motion measures, there were no significant group × time interactions. CONCLUSION: At 1-year follow-up, a PRP injection was found to be no more effective in improving quality of life, pain, disability, and shoulder range of motion than placebo in patients with chronic RCT who were treated with an exercise program.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".