Efficacy of hypertonic dextrose (prolotherapy) in early knee osteoarthritis: a short term outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent, painful, and progressive condition significantly affecting patients' quality of life and imposing a social and economic burden. Traditionally managed through symptom relief and joint function improvement, research is increasingly focusing on disease-modifying treatments. Dextrose prolotherapy, a low-cost alternative involving the injection of a hypertonic solution, has shown promise despite limited acceptance in current guidelines. Methods: This prospective cohort study, approved by the Institutional Ethical Board of Jamia Hamdard University, assessed the effects of 12.5% hypertonic dextrose prolotherapy in 92 patients with knee OA. Patients received injections at multiple sites over a 6-week period. Outcomes were evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores at baseline, 4, 8, 16, and 24 weeks. Results: Significant improvements were observed in both WOMAC and VAS scores. WOMAC scores decreased from 53.83 to 26.70 (p<0.0001), and VAS scores dropped from 7.12 to 3.06 (p<0.0001) at the 24-week follow-up. No major complications were noted, with minimal adverse effects reported. Improvement was consistent across all OA grades. Conclusions: Dextrose prolotherapy demonstrated substantial, sustained improvements in pain and function in knee OA patients. Given its safety, low cost, and efficacy, it represents a viable therapeutic option, especially in resource-constrained settings. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings and optimize treatment protocols.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".