Comparative study between intra articular injection of ozone with corticosteroids versus plasma rich in growth factors in limitation of pain in knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) represents a common degenerative disorder, characterized by a functional limitations due to chemical as well as mechanical stress on joint, leading to discomfort along with reduced range of motion (ROM). This work was aimed at comparing the ozone intra-articular injections’ effectiveness with corticosteroids versus PRGF as regards pain improvement in knee OA patients.Methods: Our prospective randomized double-blind study involved 90 cases aged from 21 to 65 years old, both sexes, diagnosed with stage 2-3 knee OA and having symptoms of Knee OA at least 3 months after getting usual conservative treatment. Cases underwent a random and equal categorization into two groups. Group O: were administered ozone with corticosteroids IA injections while Group P: were administered PRGF IA injections.Results: In first month after intra articular injection, both visual analogue scale (VAS) as well as Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA score (WOMACs) showed significantly decrease within group O as opposed to group P (p<0.001). Also, patients required for oral analgesics within group O exhibited less values as opposed to group P (p<0.001) with improvement of both flexion and extension within group O as opposed to group P. Six months after intra articular injection, both VAS and WOMACs showed significantly decrease within group P as opposed to group O (p<0.001). Also, cases required for oral analgesics within group P was less as opposed to group O (p<0.001) with improvement as regards both flexion and extension within group P as opposed to group O (p<0.001) and improvement of KL classification within group P as opposed to group O (p<0.001).Conclusions: Both intra articular injection of ozone with corticosteroids and PRGF were safe and effective in limiting pain in knee OA. Ozone plus corticosteroids could result in favorable short-term outcomes as opposed to PRGF.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".