Comparison of the Efficacy of Choorna Pinda Sweda and Parisheka Sweda with Bruhat Panchamoola Choorna in the Management of Manyastambha W.S.R Torticollis - A Clinical Randomized Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Torticollis is characterized by fixed or dynamic posturing of the head and neck involving tilt rotation and flexion often accompanied by spasms of the sternocleidomastoid trapezius and other neck muscles. Various treatment modalities including stretching exercises use of a neck brace and inj. Botulium toxin may provide temporary relief however the safety and efficacy of these interventions remain under investigation. Acharya Sushruta has mentioned Manyastambha as Kapha avruta vata and Ruksha sweda as the primary treatment modality. This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of the two methods of Ruksha swedas in the treatment of Manyastambha.Objective This study compared the efficacy of Bruhat panchamoola choorna pinda sweda and Bruhat panchamoola parisheka in reducing pain stiffness and improving range of motion.Methods It was a comparative clinical study conducted using a pre- and post-test design. Patients diagnosed with Manyasthambha were randomly selected and divided into two groups Group A received Parisheka sweda and Group B received Choorna pinda sweda with 20 patients in each group. Three outcome measures were used for the assessment pain intensity assessed using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale stiffness graded from 0 to 4 and the range of motion also graded from 0 to 4. Assessment was conducted on the 0th 8th 15th and 22nd days.Results Torticollis can be effectively managed using Parisheka sweda and Choorna pinda sweda. A comparison between the two groups revealed a statistically significant difference P lt0.05 in pain intensity and Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale TWSTRS scores on the 8th day and 15th days. Choorna pinda sweda demonstrated superior results across all the parameters and showed marked improvement in quality of life starting from 8th day of treatment.Conclusion Average percentage of improvement in Group B was 79.32 which is notably higher than the 59.22 observed in Group A. Hence it can be concluded that Choorna pinda sweda Group B was more effective than Parisheka sweda Group A in the management of Manyastambha.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".