Periosteal Electrical Dry Needling as an Adjunct to Exercise and Manual Therapy for Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of adding electrical dry needling into a manual therapy (MT) and exercise program on pain, stiffness, function, and disability in individuals with painful knee osteoarthritis (OA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 242 participants (n=242) with painful knee OA were randomized to receive 6 weeks of electrical dry needling, MT, and exercise (n=121) or MT and exercise (n=121). The primary outcome was related-disability as assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index at 3 months. RESULTS: Individuals receiving the combination of electrical dry needling, MT, and exercise experienced significantly greater improvements in related-disability (WOMAC: F=35.504; P<0.001) than those receiving MT and exercise alone at 6 weeks and 3 months. Patients receiving electrical dry needling were 1.7 times more likely to have completely stopped taking medication for their pain at 3 months than individuals receiving MT and exercise (OR, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.01; P=0.001). On the basis of the cutoff score of ≥5 on the global rating of change, significantly (χ=14.887; P<0.001) more patients (n=91, 75%) within the dry needling group achieved a successful outcome compared with the MT and exercise group (n=22, 18%) at 3 months. Effect sizes were large (standardized mean differences >0.82) for all outcome measures in favor of the electrical dry needling group at 3 months. DISCUSSION: The inclusion of electrical dry needling into a MT and exercise program was more effective for improving pain, function, and related-disability than the application of MT and exercise alone in individuals with painful knee OA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1b-therapy. Prospectively registered February 10, 2015 on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02373631).
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".