Effect of Zingiber Cassumunar Roxb. Phonophoresis Versus Aqua Sonic Gel on Pain, Range of Motion, and Functional Disability in Patients With Osteoarthritis of Knee: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this trial was to collate, analyze, and compare the effectiveness of phonophoresis and ultrasound adjunct to Otago exercise program for pain, knee range of motion, and functional disability in patients with grades I and II of knee osteoarthritis. This is a single-blind randomized control study. A total of 52 patients with pre-diagnosed osteoarthritis on radiological investigation were included in the study. They were then randomly assigned into two groups: group A (n=26) received the experimental treatment, which included phonophoresis, and group B (n=26) subjects were treated with conventional physiotherapy. The interventions were given for six days/week for two weeks. Pain via the visual analog scale, knee range of motion via a goniometer, level of functional disability through the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and balance through the star excursion balance test were evaluated. Measurements of the outcome were taken prior to initiation of intervention and on the day of the last session, succeeding the treatment. Statistically, both the groups showed significant improvement in pain, range, dynamic balance, and functioning. Between the two groups, no clinically significant difference was present for balance, but the intergroup comparison for pain and functions was statistically and therefore clinically significant. Phonophoresis treatment was observed to be effective in treating pain in osteoarthritis. Combined Otago exercises and phonophoresis with modified gel can be used to achieve superior clinical results.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".