Comparative study of the effectiveness of high-power laser and ketoprofen phonophoresis in chronic knees osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Osteoarthritis is one of the major causes of disability and reduced quality of life. characterized by progressive joint degeneration. It decreases the flexibility of the joint, and causes pain, joint effusion, deformities and loss of function. Objective. To investigate the effectiveness of phonophoresis and high-power laser therapy on bilateral knees osteoarthritis. Design. A prospective randomized double-blind trial. Setting. Outpatient Swiss physical therapy center. Methods. Thirty patients from both genders, with their age ranging from 50-65 years that had diagnosed bilateral knees osteoarthritis selected randomized assigned into two equal groups. Group (A) received single application of high-power laser NDYAG 1064nm.Group (B) received single application of phonophoresis. Pain, Difficulty and joint effusion were measured by Ultrasonographic findings and western Ontario and McMaster universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index before and after 10 sessions treatment. Results. Statistical analysis was done by using paired’ test which showed significant improvement in both groups. Therefore, there was a significant difference between Group(A) and Group(B), showing that HILL group(A) is more effective than group(B) on pain, Stiffness, Function and ultrasonographic findings (p < 0.05). Conclusion. High power laser therapy has shown significant results in the reduction of pain, stiffness, improving function and effusion in subjects with bilateral knees osteoarthritis.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".