MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389833232 · doi:10.37022/wjcmpr.v5i6.301

Platelet-rich plasma injections for hip osteoarthritis : a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4389833232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ramos Silalahi, Frans Lazio, Silvia Witarsih

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Current Medical and Pharmaceutical Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicineWOMACPlatelet-rich plasmaSystematic reviewVisual analogue scalePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialSurgeryInternal medicineMEDLINEPlateletAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent type of joint disorder. Symptomatic hip OA was observed in 9.2% of adults aged 45 and above, with 27% displaying radiographic evidence of the condition. While there is no definitive cure for OA, numerous research studies have explored the application of PRP (Platelet-Rich Plasma) for addressing knee OA, there is a relatively limited number of investigations dedicated to hip OA. It is important to note that the hip joint possesses distinct characteristics compared to the other three joints. Therefore, in this systematic review, we wanted to focus on hip osteoarthritis and gave a brief update from the previous studies. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines. All randomized control trials that compared injection of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid in hip osteoarthritis patients using English language from 2018 until 2023 will be included. Six studies involved in this study with total samples of 237 in PRP group and 220 in HA group. The injection site, injection volume, number of injections, interval, and follow up were varied between these studies. All of the patients are undergoing treatment with ultrasound-guided intraarticular injections of PRP. The outcomes tabulated were Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Harris Hip Score (HHS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score which showed improvements from the baseline. All of the studies showed improvement of the score from the baseline. Although, there were improvements, it can be concluded that there was not enough evidence to promote the utilization of intra-articular PRP injections as a treatment for hip osteoarthritis. Since international guidelines only recommend intra-articular steroid injections for managing hip OA, it would be advantageous to conduct additional studies comparing PRP to steroids to assess the effectiveness of PRP injections in treating hip OA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.008
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.425
GPT teacher head0.581
Teacher spread0.155 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Current Medical and Pharmaceutical ResearchSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207