Comparison of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injection versus placebo for clinical outcomes in patients with knee osteoarthritis; a double-blind, randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a progressively debilitating condition that leads to musculoskeletal pain, particularly in the knee joint. Most clinical guidelines recommend platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for knee OA. However, the use of PRP in knee OA is increasing. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the effects of intra-articular administration of PRP on the symptoms, lower limb function, and daily living activities in patients with knee OA. Patients and Methods: A double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted and 34 patients with grade 2 or 3 knee OA were enrolled. The knees of each participant were randomly allocated to receive either 3cc PRP injection (PRP knees) or needling only (control knees). Patients were evaluated by a general practitioner before, three, and six months after the intervention using the EuroQol-visual analog scales (EQ-VAS), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and the Tegner Activity Score (TAS). Results: The mean (±SD) age of patients with knee OA was 56.6 ± 10.2 years. Seventy-point-six percent of patients were female. 67.6% and 32.4% of patients were in stages 2 and 3 of the disease, respectively. IKDC, WOMAC, TAS, and EQ-VAS scores in knees under PRP injection and control of knees, three and six months after injection showed significant improvement. Three and six months after the intervention, IKDC, WOMAC, TAS, and EQ-VAS scores in the PRP and control knees were not significant (P > 0.05). Inter-group comparison indicated that the IKDC score significantly increased six months in comparison to three months (P = 0.048) in PRP knees, but not significant in the control knees (P = 0.133). TAS score in PRP and control knees significantly increased six months compared to three months after injection. WOMAC and EQ-VAS score in PRP and control knees was not significant at six months in comparison to three months after the intervention. Conclusion: Our findings could suggest safety and feasibility data for the intra-articular administration of PRP in patients with knee OA that may help to appraise a larger clinical trial. Findings show that PRP injection improves IKDC, WOMAC, TAS, and EQ-VAS scores, however, there was no significant difference with needling only (control knees). Trial Registration: The trial protocol was approved by the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trial (identifier: IRCT2015010112823N2; https://en.irct.ir/trial/12827, Ethics committee reference number: 93/551664) and Research Registry (Research Registry Unique Identifying Number: researchregistry9843).
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".