MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289531895 · doi:10.5704/moj.2207.004

A Comparative Study of Osteoarthritis Knee Arthroscopy versus Intra-Articular Platelet Rich Plasma Injection: A Randomised Study

2022· article· en· W4289531895 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
N Singh, Vidushi K. Trivedi, Vinod Kumar, Mishra NK, Sabih Ahmad, Ayar SJ, Kataria SS, H Kharbanda

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaysian Orthopaedic Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisWOMACPlatelet-rich plasmaVisual analogue scalePhysical therapyArthroscopyPopulationArthritisSurgeryInternal medicinePlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Osteoarthritis (OA) is estimated to be the fourth leading cause of disability in the general population. It probably is the most common disease of joints in adults throughout the world. Knee OA accounts for more than 80% of the disease's total burden and as per an estimate in US population, it affects at least 19% of adults aged 45 years and older. This was a randomised study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of platelet rich plasma (PRP) as a treatment modality for osteoarthritis knee in comparison to arthroscopic management. Materials and methods: This study was conducted from 2018 to 2020 at a tertiary care teaching hospital, under reference number ELMC&H/RCELL2019/39. A total of 70 patients of osteoarthritis knee with grade 2-3 according to the Kellgren-Lawrence classification were selected using computer generated random number among them 35 patients were subjected to arthroscopy (Group II) and 35 were administered platelet rich plasma injection (Group I) and evaluated at 3, 6 and 9 months of follow-up. Both the groups were assessed and scored with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) to compare pre-treatment and post-treatment values. As all the patients in the sample was followed-up, resulting into no loss of subjects. Result: Overall, percentage reduction in VAS score at 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months was 24.45±9.09, 18.45±11.60 and 8.29±14.19%, respectively in Group I and 18.96±5.85, 7.33±8.60 and 3.20±7.39%, respectively in Group II. A statistically significant difference between two groups was observed at 3- and 6-months' time intervals only (p<0.05). Overall, percentage reduction in WOMAC score at 3 months, 6 months and 9 months was 24.03±11.41, 17.45±9.24, and 9.49±9.80%, respectively in Group I and 11.27±5.73, 5.70±4.78, and -0.13±5.06%, respectively in Group II. At all the three-time intervals, the difference between two groups was significant statistically (p<0.001). Conclusion: This study suggested that both PRP as well as arthroscopy provide a reduction in WOMAC and VAS scores for pain among cases of knee osteoarthritis. Most effective reduction is observed at three months follow-up which thereafter tends to diminish. Of the two modalities, PRP seemed to have an edge over arthroscopic debridement, however, this efficacy was more pronounced for Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 2 as compared to Grade 3.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaysian Orthopaedic JournalSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207