MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402038125 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000039369

The combined application of pulsed electromagnetic fields and platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of early-stage knee osteoarthritis: A randomized clinical trial

2024· article· en· W4402038125 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rongda Xu, Jiahui Li, He Zhang, Hai-rui Liang, Ming Sun, Hang Wen, Xueting Zhou, Han-fei Liu, Zhencun Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisPlatelet-rich plasmaRandomized controlled trialStage (stratigraphy)Physical therapyInternal medicinePlateletPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of combined treatment with pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection in improving pain and functional mobility among patients with early-stage knee osteoarthritis (KOA). We hypothesize that this combined therapy can yield superior treatment outcomes. METHODS: Based on the different treatment regimens, we divided 48 patients diagnosed with Kellgren-Lawrence grades I-III KOA into 3 groups: the PRP group, the PEMFs group, and the PRP + PEMFs group. Each subtype of KOA patients was randomly assigned to different treatment groups. In the PRP group, patients received intra-articular injections of leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma once a month for 3 consecutive months. In the PEMFs group, patients receive low-frequency PEMFs irradiation therapy with a frequency of 30 Hz and intensity of 1.5 mT, once daily, 5 times a week, for a consecutive treatment period of 12 weeks. In the PRP + PEMFs group, patients receive both of the aforementioned treatment protocol. The treatment effects on patients are evaluated at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, and 12 post-treatment. Assessment parameters include visual analog scale for pain, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Lequesne Index score, and knee joint range of motion. RESULTS: From the 4th to the 12th week of treatment, the visual analog scale scores, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores, and Lequesne index scores of patients in all 3 groups gradually decreased, while knee joint mobility gradually increased (P < .05). At weeks 4, 8, and 12 after treatment, the PRP combined with PEMFs group showed significantly better scores compared to the PRP group and the PEMFs group, with statistically significant differences (P < .05). A total of 7 patients experienced adverse reactions such as knee joint swelling, low-grade fever, and worsening knee joint pain after treatment, all of which disappeared within 1 week after treatment. The incidence of complications did not differ significantly among the 3 groups (P = .67). CONCLUSION: PRP, PEMFs, and the combination of PRP and PEMFs therapy all effectively alleviate knee joint pain and improve joint function. However, compared to single treatment modalities, the combined therapy of PRP and PEMFs demonstrates more pronounced efficacy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207