The effectiveness of pulsed ultrasound treatment on pain, function, synovial sac thickness and femoral cartilage thickness in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind clinical, controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to investigate the efficacy of therapeutic pulsed ultrasound on pain, function, synovial sac and femoral cartilage in knee osteoarthritis. Design: Randomized, double-blind, controlled study Setting: Dokuz Eylul University, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Subjects: A total of 96 patients with knee osteoarthritis Interventions: Participants were randomized into two groups; Group I ( n = 48, pulsed ultrasound) and Group II ( n = 48, sham ultrasound). The sessions were held three times a week for 8 weeks. The study continued for 12 weeks (with 4 weeks follow-up). All participants performed exercises at home for 12 weeks. Main measures: Knee pain (at rest and ADLs) was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS). Functionality was assessed using the Timed Up and Go test and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) questionnaire. Femoral cartilage and synovial sac thickness was measured using ultrasonography. All evaluations were performed at the baseline, at the 8 and 12 weeks after baseline. Results: The study was completed with a total of 75 patients ( n = 39 in group I and n = 36 in group II). The mean (SD) pain at ADLs score at baseline and week 12 was 7.2 (2.1), with 3.6 (2.9) in the group I, and 6.7 (2.0) and 4.3 (2.2) in the group II, respectively. Both groups presented significant improvements in terms of pain and function ( P < 0.001). There was no difference between groups for any parameters. Conclusion: Treatment of pulsed ultrasound has no positive effect on knee pain, function, femoral cartilage and synovial sac thickness in knee osteoarthritis.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".