MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134763991 · doi:10.9734/jpri/2021/v33i631191

Effect of Platelet Rich Plasma Injection Effect on Knee Osteoarthritis in Elderly: Single Dose versus Double Dose Randomized Clinical Trial

2021· article· en· W3134763991 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hassan Amir Us Saqlain, Syed Sajid Hussain, Niaz Hussain Keerio, Masood Ahmed Qureshi, Nuresh Kumar Valecha, Syed Shahid Noor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Research International · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisWOMACPlatelet-rich plasmaClinical trialRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyInternal medicineInformed consentSurgeryPlateletAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effect of platelet rich plasma (PRP) and compare between single and double dose regimens among patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis admitted to the orthopedic department of Al Qassimi Hospital Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Methods: 200 patients were allocated into two groups in this randomized clinical trial. Patients were chosen to participate in this study after an informed consent. The trial took place at the Al Qassimi Hospital Sharjah, United Arab Emirates from July 2019 to July 2020. All patients had knee osteoarthritis, half of them received single dose PRP (group A) and the other half received double dose PRP (group B). All patients were adults and older than 18 years of age. Patients were followed up using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC). The follow up was done prior to the administration of PRP, at 1 month, 3 month and 6 months after administration. Data was analyzed using SPSS program. Ethical approval was gained from the hospital as well as from patients. Results: The mean age of the patients was 48.5 ± 8.3 years. The study included 200 participants, among them, 60 were females and 140 were males. There was improvements in all parameters of WOMAC at 3 and 4 weeks following administration of PRP. The effect of PRP continued until 6 months of follow up with no differences between the two groups. Group A baseline WOMAC parameters (pain, stiffness, physical function and total score) mean score were 15.8, 6.24, 43.01 and 65.22 respectively. At the follow up, the mean scores were 4.73, 1.78, 13.88 and 19.56 respectively. This shows significant improvement. On the other hand, group B baseline mean scores were 16.31, 6.81, 40.89 and 64.77 respectively. At the final follow up of group B, the parameters mean scores were 4.40, 1.11, 13.64 and 20.27 respectively. Both groups were compared to each other and no benefit for the double dose over the single dose (P value, 0.66). Conclusion: Previous results suggests improvement in functionality in both groups of the trial. There was pain and stiffness relief among all patients. It is concluded that double dose has no additional effect to the single dose regimen.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.172
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical Research InternationalSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207