Effect of Warm Epsom Salt Pack over Knee Osteoarthritis-A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: Osteoarthritis, the most common form of arthritis which commonly affects weight-bearing joints like the knee, hip, spine, and joints. Since the effectiveness of conventional medicine on severe types of osteoarthritis is surgical intervention, the patients are seeking alternative medicine. A warm Epsom salt pack is used commonly for pains over joints. Hence this study is undertaken. Study Design: Randomized Controlled Trial. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Naturopathy, SDM College of Naturopathy and Yogic Sciences, between November 2019 and January2020. Methodology: From the inpatient department of Shri Dharmasthala Yoga and Nature cure Hospital Shanthivana, hundred subjects diagnosed with osteoarthritis belonging to the age groupof35to75yearswererecruitedandwererandomlyallocated to case (Warm Epsom salt pack) and control group. Subjects were assessed for Goniometry, Visual analog scale (VAS), Shortform-12(SF-12), Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index Scale (WOMAC) before and after the intervention of 20 minutes. Results: The study was done to evaluate the effect of Warm Epsom salt on Knee Osteoarthritis. There were 100 subjects in the sample. Shapiro-Wilk’s test/Quantile-Quantile (QQ) plot was used to check the normality of variables. In study group there was a significant decrease in Goniometry (p=<0.0001), SF 12 (p=<0.0001), WOMAC (P=<0.0001). In the control group, other than VAS there were no significant changes in other variables (Goniometry, WOMAC, SF-12). Conclusion: Our study indicates that a warm Epsom salt pack may reduce pain, stiffness, range of motion, and improves the quality of life. The study revealed that Warm Epsom salt reduced Range of motion from 172.94 to 134.5, WOMAC from 65.94 to 26.38, and Quality of life from 33.98 to 31.22. Results reveal with significant improvement (p<0.001) in pain, swelling, and quality of life.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".