ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2016
The efficacy and safety of intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid in the knee and physical therapy agents to treat Kashin-Beck disease: A prospective interventional study.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the responsiveness of the WOMAC and the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 in patients with Kashin-Beck disease.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- Outcomes of total knee arthroplasty in the adult Kashin-Beck disease with severe osteoarthritis.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to determine whether hyaluronic acid (HA) or physical therapy agents (PTA) can improve functional parameters in patients with knee Kashin-Beck disease (KBD). For 2 years, patients (n=55) were treated with HA weekly for 5 weeks, then received 6th and 7th injections on the 3rd and 6th month, respectively, for 7 injections in total. Patients (n=53) were treated with PTA five times a week for 3 weeks every month for 6 months. The patients were evaluated with the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the visual analog pain scale (VAS). Trial registration, ChiCTR-TRC-12002189 (http://www.chictr.org/). During the study, following treatment interruption, pain increased in the PTA group (from a mean value of 85.7±83.8 mm at month 12 to 145.2±128.8 mm at month 18 and 201.3±150.5 mm at month 24), while it remained stable in the HA group (from a mean value of 80.7±70.6 mm at month 12 to 90.1±95.2 mm at month 18 and 82.6±85.3 mm at month 24), with a statistically significant difference in favor of HA at month 18 (P<0.05) and month 24 (P<0.05). Joint stiffness, physical function and total WOMAC showed the same trend as pain. The global efficacy judgments by the patients and the investigators showed a statistically significant difference in favor of HA at month 18 (P<0.05) and month 24 (P<0.05). In conclusion, although all the patients improved in terms of pain and function, HA was superior to PTA alone for pain relief and lasting effect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.