MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894350569 · doi:10.30476/jrsr.2018.44678

Is Cupping Therapy in Combination with Routine Physical Therapy Effective in the Management of Knee Osteoarthritis? A Randomized Controlled Trial

2018· article· en· W2894350569 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sara Abolahrari-Shirazi, Farahnaz Ghafari Nezhad, Ziba Ahmadpour, Leila Zare, Farahnaz Emami

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisWOMACPhysical therapyCupping therapyRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scaleKnee painRange of motionQuality of life (healthcare)Psychological interventionManual therapySurgeryAcupunctureAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Osteoarthritis is a common form of arthritis accompanied by varying degrees of disability and reduced quality of life. Several management regimens are available to treat knee osteoarthritis. Cupping therapy is used to treat musculoskeletal disorders but its effects on knee osteoarthritis has remained unclear. The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of intermittent cupping therapy plus routine physical therapy with routine physical therapy alone in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Methods: Twenty-six patients with knee osteoarthritis were randomly assigned into two groups: intermittent cupping therapy plus routine physical therapy (intervention group, n=13) and routine physical therapy alone (control group, n=13). In the routine physical therapy group, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, hot pack, and ultrasound were used, while in the cupping therapy group, intermittent vacuum therapy was used together with routine physical therapy. Both groups received 10 treatment sessions over a period of 2 weeks. Pain intensity was measured via visual analog scale (VAS). Further, functional disability was assessed using the Persian version of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index questionnaire. Finally, knee joint passive range of motion (ROM) was measured with photography preand post-intervention. Results: At follow-up, both groups had significantly lower pain intensity and functional disability, and higher knee passive ROM compared to their respective pre-intervention values (P<0.05). However, no significant differences were observed between groups in pain intensity or passive ROM in the knee (P>0.05). Differences in total WOMAC scores between pre- and post-intervention were significantly greater in the control group than in the intervention group (P<0.05). Conclusion: Based on the results, both interventions can be effective in relieving symptoms in patients with knee OA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.414 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicAcupuncture Treatment Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207