A preliminary study on efficacy of sequential injection therapy of glucocorticoid and hyaluronan for knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the efficacy of sequential injection therapy of glucocorticoid and hyaluronan for knee osteoarthritis.Methods From Aug.2012 to Aug.2013,64 patients with knee osteoarthritis were treated in our hospital department.All the patients were randomly divided into two groups with double-blind method.For the experimental group,32 patients were treated with glucocorticoid(Diprospan) injection in the first week and with sodium hyaluronate(ARTZ) in the following two weeks.For the control group,32 patients were treated only with sodium hyaluronate during the three weeks.The Western Ontario Mc Master(WOMAC) instrument was adopted to evaluate the efficacy and the repeated measures analysis of variance was adopted to make a comparison between above two therapies.Results In the experimental group,only 1 case had slight redness after injection,and soon went away.In the control group,1 case appeared dizzy after injection,due to allergic reaction to lidocaine,but it disappeared after having a rest.WOMAC scores,pain scores,functional scores measured in the 2 groups were significantly decreased after 1,2,3 weeks treatment.What's more,scores of the experimental group were lower.There were statistically significant differences between two groups(P 0.05).However,WOMAC scores,pain scores and functional scores were increased in different degrees after 6 month therapy,but scores of the experimental group were still significantly lower than before treatment(P 0.05).WOMAC pain scores of the control group had no statistically significant difference after treatment(P 0.05).WOMAC stiff scores of two groups also had no statistically significant difference(P 0.05).Conclusion The effect of sequential injection therapy of glucocorticoid(Diprospan) and sodium hyaluronate(ARTZ) for knee osteoarthritis is better than that of sodium hyaluronate only.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".