Comparison of Radial Pressure Waves and Focused Extracorporeal Shock Waves in Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate and compare the clinical efficacy of radial pressure waves and focused external shock wave therapy for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Materials and Methods: From October 2020, 90 patients aged 45–65 years old with Kellgren and Lawrence classification (K-L) stage I and II of KOA were selected in our hospital or randomly assigned to 3 groups with 30 cases in each group. One group was treated with antiinflamatory medication. The other two groups received one course of treatment (once a week, 4 times in total) performed by using radial focused shock waves respectively, and follow-up was conducted by telephone and outpatient review 3, 6, and 9 months after the treatment. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) osteoarthritis score were used before and after treatment. Results: (1) VAS, WOMAC, and evaluation indexes of both treated groups were better than those of the control group (oral drug group); (3) The score of the radial group was significantly different from that of the focused group (P > 0.05). Conclusion: (1) Focused and radial pressure waves (RPW) have good clinical therapeutic effect on early KOA (2) Comparison of long-term effect: focused shock waves are more significant than radial (3) Radial pressure waves area good indication in relatively young patients, short course of disease (within 1 year), and K-L stage I an II. (4) In older patients, with more than a year of symptoms and K-L stages II and III, focal waves are more effective than radial waves. (5) Patients with acute onset and night pain or accompanied by obvious effusion can first take nonsteroidal drugs orally continuously for a week, and the treatment effect is better. During treatment, the drugs can be continued or stopped according to the specific conditions. When synovial edema and effusion of the joint decreased, the conventional parameters were used for treatment. Keywords: Knee osteoarthritis, Extracorporeal shock wave therapy, Radial Pressure Waves
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".