Effect of platelet-rich plasma injections versus placebo on pain and quality of life in patients with hip osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to compare the efficacy of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections over a saline placebo in terms of reduction of pain and impact on quality of life among patients with hip osteoarthritis. Patients and methods: A total of 60 patients (29 males, 31 females, mean age: 57.9±7.3 years; range, 47 to 69 years) with known hip osteoarthritis of Kellgren-Lawrance (KL) Grades 2/3 were randomized into placebo (n=30) and PRP groups (n=30) between June 2014 and June 2015. Both groups received intra-articular injections into the hip joint under ultrasound guidance for three consecutive weeks. The patients were followed for six months, and pain reduction was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire, and Short Form Health Survey-36 (SF-36). Results: Intra-articular PRP treatment showed no advantage over a saline placebo in terms of VAS scores during activity. Both groups showed a significant improvement in VAS activity scores at one and six months. The placebo group showed improvements in VAS resting scores, whereas the PRP group did not. Both groups showed no improvement in WOMAC-total scores. Both groups showed no significant improvement across most SF-36 domains with the exception of improved physical role functioning at one month and general health at one and six months in the placebo group. Conclusion: Intra-articular injections of PRP show no significant difference compared to a saline placebo over a period of six months on pain, function, and quality of life scores in patients with hip 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".