Clinical Efficacy of Adhesion Release Under Brachial Plexus Block Plus Silver Needle Warm Acupuncture on Frozen Shoulder and Recovery of Limb Function.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of combining adhesion release under brachial plexus block with silver needle warm acupuncture for the treatment of frozen shoulder, compared to adhesion release under brachial plexus block alone. Methods: A total of 72 patients with frozen shoulder were randomly assigned to receive either adhesion release under brachial plexus block (control group) or adhesion release under brachial plexus block plus silver needle warm acupuncture (treatment group). Outcome measures included changes in shoulder pain scores assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), shoulder mobility scores evaluated using the Constant-Murley Score, shoulder function scores measured using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, and overall clinical outcomes based on a comprehensive evaluation. Both groups received functional exercise 2 days after the operation, and the treatment duration was 3 weeks. Results: The treatment group exhibited a mean reduction in shoulder pain scores of 3.2 points on the Short-form McGill pain scores, while the control group showed a reduction of 1.5 points. Shoulder mobility scores, assessed by the Constant-Murley Score, increased by an average of 18.6 points in the treatment group, compared to 9.2 points in the control group. Moreover, the treatment group achieved better shoulder function scores on the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, with an average improvement of 25.4 points, compared to 13.8 points in the control group. Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into the clinical efficacy of adhesion release under brachial plexus block plus silver needle warm acupuncture for frozen shoulder, there are still areas that warrant further investigation. Future research could focus on the long-term effects of the treatment, optimal treatment duration and frequency, comparison with other treatment modalities, and the inclusion of larger sample sizes to enhance the robustness of the findings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".