The Efficacy of Multimodal Physiotherapy versus Usual Care in Chronic Whiplash-Associated Disorders With Facet-Mediated Pain Undergoing Platelet Rich Plasma treatment: A Series of Single Case Experimental Designs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Purpose Chronic whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) is a heterogeneous condition with limited effective treatment options available. This study evaluated the effectiveness of multimodal physiotherapy versus usual care in chronic WAD with facet-mediated pain receiving platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections to determine if pain interference and confidence completing activities in the presence of neck pain could be improved. Materials and Methods A multiple-baseline, single-case experimental design was used to evaluate the 6-week effect of physiotherapy or usual care in two groups of three participants each. Results All six participants demonstrated a significant reduction in pain interference, and three participants showed improved confidence to perform daily activities when in pain. Weighted Tau-U demonstrated a significant reduction of pain interference with large to very large effect sizes (> 0.75) for both interventions in all participants irrespective of treatment allocation with no significant group difference demonstrated. Similar effects were demonstrated for the confidence to perform daily activities with neck pain (ES > 0.46), although this was only evident in three participants (two PT and one UC). Generalization measures also showed improvements in pain and disability, psychological and quality of life outcomes. No adverse events were reported. Conclusions Both physiotherapy and usual care demonstrated improvements in pain interference and confidence to perform activities of daily living with neck pain in people with chronic WAD following cervical facet joint PRP. Trial Registration The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Protocol Number: NCT03949959 )
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 | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".