Clinical Efficacy of Ultrasound-guided Iliopsoas Corticosteroid Injection for Hip Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Iliopsoas bursitis and tendinopathy are common causes of hip pain and major contributors to snapping hip syndrome, which affects 5-10% of the general population. These conditions often are treated with conservative measures, including corticosteroid injections into the iliopsoas bursa. However, the clinical effectiveness of such injections has not been well studied. Through this study, the authors evaluated the efficacy of ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections into the iliopsoas bursa. Methods: The study included 68 patients diagnosed with iliopsoas tendinopathy, iliopsoas bursitis, or snapping hip syndrome (coxa saltans), all of whom received corticosteroid injections into the iliopsoas bursa as a standard treatment. A single-sample, non-experimental design was employed, with participants completing assessments of pain, mechanical symptoms, physical function, activity level, and total hip score at baseline, and again at three- and six-month post-injection. Data were collected from January 1, 2023, to April 1, 2024, and changes in the outcome measures were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA. Results: Participants showed significant improvements in pain, mechanical symptoms, physical function, and activity level at both three-month and six-month follow-ups. Additionally, overall hip scores improved statistically by the end of the study. Conclusions: Our data suggest that ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections into the iliopsoas bursa can effectively improve physical function, enhance the ability to perform daily activities and physical tasks, and reduce disability associated with iliopsoas tendinopathy. Further research with a longer follow-up period and more rigorous controls is warranted to confirm these findings and assess the long-term benefits and potential risks of the procedure.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".