Cervical facet joint platelet-rich plasma in people with chronic whiplash-associated disorders: A prospective case series of longer term 6- and 12- month outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To explore the 6- and 12-month effectiveness of a single autologous injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in cervical facet joints of people with chronic WAD and facet-mediated pain. Design: A prospective case series of people with chronic whiplash-associated disorders and cervical facet joint mediated pain in a community setting. Interventions: We investigated 44 consecutive people who underwent cervical facet joint PRP ( ± adjunct physiotherapy) between 2019 and 2021, selected for PRP based on 80% relief following single diagnostic medial branch blocks or 50% relief and a significant improvement in performing a previously limited activity of daily living. Measures: Measures of pain (numerical pain rating scale - NPRS) and disability (Neck Disability Index - NDI) were collected prior to and 3-, 6- and 12- months following cervical facet joint PRP in an electronic registry database. Success was defined as those exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for pain (>15%) and disability (>10%). We also calculated the proportion of people with greater than 50% relief of pain. People not reached for follow-up were considered failures for worst-case analysis. Results: Forty-four people (82% female, mean age = 45.2 (range: 25-71) years) underwent cervical facet joint PRP. Nine people received repeat PRP interventions. Thirty-five people provided 12-month data. There was a significant improvement in pain and disability following PRP (and possibly adjunct physiotherapy) received during this time period. At 12-months, 53% of people exceeded MCID for pain, reporting a mean improvement of 66% (95%CI: 55-77%) on the NPRS. For NDI scores, 69% of people exceeded MCID, reporting a mean improvement of 48% (95%CI: 38-58%). Thirty-seven percent of people reported greater than 50% relief of pain 12-months post-cervical facet joint PRP. Conclusion: In people with chronic WAD and facet-mediated pain, our long-term data suggests that PRP (and possibly adjunct physiotherapy) is effective. A controlled study is warranted to evaluate the efficacy of PRP.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".