ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2016
Utilization of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Musculoskeletal Injuries: An Analysis of Current Treatment Trends in the United States.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04985396 (Effect of Platelet Rich Plasma Injection Compared With Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Effect of Platelet Rich Plasma Injection Compared With Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.
- Platelet-rich plasma use in meniscus repair treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Pooled it
- Proximal Hamstring Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review of Interventions.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2021Pooled it
- Meniscus Repair and Regeneration: A Systematic Review from a Basic and Translational Science Perspective.Clinics in sports medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Effect of platelet-rich plasma versus steroid injection in plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Trial
- Evolving Treatment Options for Spinal Pain: Balancing Innovation and Affordability in Regenerative Medicine.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
- Global trends in platelet-rich plasma research: A bibliometric review with hotspot visualization.Medicine · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Patients With Meniscal Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Review
- Do Preparation Techniques Transform the Metabolite Profile of Platelet-Rich Plasma?Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Randomized Controlled Trials for Platelet-Rich Plasma Use in Knee Osteoarthritis Rarely Report Key Sociodemographic Patient Variables: A Scoping Review.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Time to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) Post Intra-Articular Injection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Current Challenges in the Development of Platelet-Rich Plasma-Based Therapies.BioMed research international · 2024Review
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes after Platelet-Rich Plasma and Rotator Cuff Repair in High-Grade Intrasubstance Partial Rotator Cuff Tears.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The Potency of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trial.Asian spine journal · 2023Article
- Substantial Variability in Platelet-Rich Plasma Composition Is Based on Patient Age and Baseline Platelet Count.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- The role of platelet-rich plasma in shoulder pathologies: a critical review of the literature.EFORT open reviews · 2023Review
- Variability in Patient-Incurred Costs and Protocols of Regenerative Medicine Procedures for Musculoskeletal Conditions in the United States.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2023Article
- Global research trends on platelet-rich plasma for tendon and ligament injuries from the past two decades: A bibliometric and visualized study.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Pectoralis Major Tendon Repair with and without Platelet-Rich Plasma.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Sport-Specific Rehabilitation, but Not PRP Injections, Might Reduce the Re-Injury Rate of Muscle Injuries in Professional Soccer Players: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlatelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as a popular biologic treatment for musculoskeletal injuries and conditions. Despite numerous investigations on the efficacy of PRP therapy, current utilization of this treatment within the United States is not widely known. PURPOSE: To investigate the national utilization of PRP, including the incidence and conditions for which it is used in the clinical setting, and to determine the current charges associated with this treatment. STUDY
designDescriptive epidemiology study.
methodsUsing a national database (PearlDiver) of private insurance billing records, we conducted a comprehensive search using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes to identify patients who received PRP injections over a 2-year period (2010-2011). Associated International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9) codes were identified to determine the specific conditions the injection was used to treat. The aggregate patient data were analyzed by yearly quarter, practice setting, geographic region, and demographics. PRP therapy charges were calculated and reported as per-patient average charges (PPACs).
resultsA total of 2571 patients who received PRP injections were identified; 51% were male and 75% were older than 35 years. The overall incidence ranged from 5.9 to 7.9 per 1000 patients over the study period. PRP was most commonly administered in hospitals (39%) and ambulatory surgical centers (37%) compared with in private offices (26%). The most common conditions treated were knee meniscus/plica disorders, followed by unspecified shoulder conditions, rotator cuff injuries, epicondylitis, and plantar fasciitis. Further evaluation revealed that 25% of all patients received injections for cartilage-related conditions, 25% meniscus, 25% unspecified, 12% tendon, 8% glenoid labrum, and 5% ligament. The PPAC for PRP treatment was US$1755 per injection.
conclusionDespite a lack of consensus regarding PRP indications and efficacy, we observed widespread application of this treatment for a myriad of musculoskeletal injuries. Most treated patients were older than 35 years, and the most commonly treated conditions included cartilage and meniscus disorders. Given the current controversy surrounding this treatment, further studies are necessary to guide clinicians on the value of this therapy for each clinical diagnosis.
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.