Effectiveness of Blind & Ultrasound Guided Corticosteroid Injection in Impingement Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Local steroid injections are common for treatment of impingement syndrome. Corticosteroid injections methods are basically in two formats, blind or with image guidance. The aim of this study is to compare the effect of ultrasound-guided in comparison with blind corticosteroid injections in patients with impingement syndrome. This study is a randomized clinical trial study undertaken in patients with diagnosis of impingement syndrome done in Isfahan University of Medical Science clinics from February 2014 to February 2015. The number of all patients registered in the study is 48; and then 40 patients were allocated to either control group randomly which received blind steroid injection or case group that underwent ultrasound-guided steroid injection. The clinical symptoms were assessed using Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) questionnaire, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and shoulder range of motion (ROM) using goniometer at baseline and six weeks after the injection. Data analysis revealed a significant difference in the mean of the VAS, SPADI and shoulder ROM in both groups 6 weeks after intervention (P < 0.05). Patients with ultrasound guided corticosteroid injection had statistically significant improvements in function and shoulder ROM (abduction, flexion) compared to blind injection group after 6 weeks (P<0.05). There was not significant differences in pain (VAS) and internal and external rotation between these two groups (p>0.05). Our findings suggest that US image guided can improve the shoulder function of patients with impingement syndrome, and thus can be considered in comprehensive care programs of these patients for fast speed of rehabilitation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".