Intraarticular corticosteroid injections in the management of osteoarthritis knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:- The aim of the study was to assess therapeutic efficacy, adverse events and patient satisfaction of intraarticular (IA) corticosteroid injections for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods:- Thirty-two (96) patients with OA of the knee participated in the present study. The inclusion criteria included (1) Resting visual analog scale pain >50 mm (2) Radiographic evidence for osteoarthritis (as per Kellgren-Lawrence scale) plus; age ≥50yrs, morning stiffness ≤ 30 min and crepitus on motion. Baseline Western Ontario and MacMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and visual analogue score (VAS) were documented. Patients received intra-articular injections of triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg in the affected knee. The patients were reviewed at 1 weeks, 4 weeks and 8 weeks post-injection with final analysis at 3 months. Use of over the counter analgesia in the form of acetaminophen was allowed for concomitant analgesia. Results:- Ninety-six patients (male =45, female=51) with mean age of 50±5 years (range 45-55); duration of symptoms 5.7 ± 0.5 years and mean body mass index (BMI) 29.4kg/m2 were available at final follow-up. The VAS scores at baseline were:- at rest=71 and after 30 meter walk=80 and improved to 35 and 40, respectively. Improvement in pain and disability based on the WOMAC scores were significant. The overall efficacy “Knee Society Score” was judged as excellent in 56.25%, satisfactory in 21.87%, fair in 18.75%, and poor in 3.12%. The beneficial effects stayed till 4-6 weeks. Conclusion:- Intra-articular steroid injections for knee OA is safe and effective. The symptomatic relief is prompt, particularly in presence of inflammation (Effusion/synovitis). Proper patient selection and aseptic precautions yield satisfactory results. The need for concomitant analgesia is reduced.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".