Can Hylan G-F 20 with corticosteroid meet the expectations of osteoarthritis patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to document expectations and outcomes of active adults suffering from knee osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent treatment protocol of hyaluronic acid injection series with single injection of corticosteroid at initial injection. Our hypothesis was that patients would have functional improvement and pain relief following treatment, and that this treatment protocol will meet patients' expectations of treatment for knee OA. Forty-seven knees (range, 42-80 years) with a diagnosis of knee OA completed a self-administered questionnaire before and post injection series. Prior to injections, patients completed a validated expectation questionnaire and activity level questions. Following treatment, patients expected pain relief, to walk longer distances, and to increase activity level. Patients showed significant improvement in WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) pain subscale, comparing pre-injection and 6 months post-injection scores (P = .003) and overall WOMAC score (P = .038). SF-12 physical component significantly improved. Patients in this study expected to return to high levels of activity. Results showed significant improvement in pain relief and function. Our results supported that Hylan G-F 20 and corticosteroid are able to meet expectations of older patients with OA who desire to return to an active lifestyle. This study showed patient expectations do influence patient outcome scores and patient satisfaction.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".