Comparing the Efficacy of Local Corticosteroid Injection, Platelet-Rich Plasma, and Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy in the Treatment of Pes Anserine Bursitis: A Prospective, Randomized, Comparative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Pes anserine bursitis (PAB) is one of the most common causes of painful knee syndromes. This study aimed at examining the efficacy of local corticosteroid injection, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection, and extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) as different modalities to alleviate pain and enhance function in patients with pes anserine bursitis (PAB). Methods. A prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted on 180 patients diagnosed with chronic PAB. They were equally divided into three groups as follows: Group I received a local corticosteroid injection of 40 mg of methylprednisolone acetate/1 ml; Group II received a PRP injection; and in Group III, ESWT was used. Outcome measures included the visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain score, WOMAC physical function score, and Ritchie articular index (RAI) for tenderness, which were recorded at the baseline, after 1 week, and after 8 weeks. Results. Before the application of procedures, there was a statistically significant increase in the WOMAC pain score in the local corticosteroid group compared to the PRP group and the ESWT group ( P < 0.001 ). After the application of procedures, there was a statistically significant improvement in the 1-week and 8-week WOMAC pain score, WOMAC physical function score, and VAS in the local corticosteroid group in comparison to the PRP group and the ESWT group. ( P < 0.001 ). Moreover, RAI for tenderness shows statistically significant improvement at 8 weeks in the local corticosteroid groups compared to the PRP groups ( P < 0.001 ) and ESWT groups ( P < 0.001 ). Similarly, a statistically significant difference was found between the PRP and ESWT groups ( P = 0.023 ). Conclusion. Our data suggest that in patients with PAB, local corticosteroid injection is more efficient than PRP injection and ESWT for reducing pain and enhancing function.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".