Comparative study of clinical and functional outcome of treatment of mild to moderate osteoarthritis of knee joint between intra articular platelet rich plasma and Hyaluronic acid injection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To compare the clinical and functional outcomes of treatment of mild to moderate osteoarthritis of knee joint by using intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injection versus hyaluronic acid injection. Methods: Total of 60 patients with grade 0 to grade 2 osteoarthritis were included in the study, of which 30 were treated with intra-articular PRP and the other 30 with intra-articular HA. Patients was evaluated before and after the procedure using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at 6, 12, 24 weeks respectively.Results: Both groups had clinical improvement but excellent results were seen in the group of patients receiving platelet-rich plasma injections indicated by their VAS and WOMAC scores at 6, 12 week and 24 week follow-up. No severe adverse effects were observed in both the groups. Conclusions: Our comparative study analyzed that application of autologous Platelet rich plasma is a safe and effective method in the treatment of mild to moderate stages of knee osteoarthritis. Significant better results was seen with 6 months of follow-up compared to hyaluronic acid. Moreover platelet rich plasma is cost effective than hyaluronic acid injection.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".