↓ Skip to main content

Hyaluronic acid compared with corticosteroid injections for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized control trail

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
Title
Hyaluronic acid compared with corticosteroid injections for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized control trail
Published in
SpringerPlus, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2020-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alireza Askari, Tahereh Gholami, Mohammad Mehdi NaghiZadeh, Mojtaba Farjam, Seyed Amin Kouhpayeh, Zahra Shahabfard

Abstract

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common chronic condition of the joints that takes place when the cartilage or a low friction surface between joints breaks down which leads to pain, stiffness and swelling. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) in comparison to corticosteroids (CS) for knee osteoarthritis. 140 patients with knee osteoarthritis, who were followed for 3 months, were randomized to receive intra-articular injection of either hyaluronic acid or corticosteroid. By receiving one injection of drug during the enrollment in the study, the patients were treated. With the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the visual analog pain scale, an independent, blinded evaluator assessed the patients three times. The mean age of the patients in the corticosteroid group were 57 ± 1.9 years and in Hyaluronic acid group were 58.5 ± 8.3 years. WOMAC score represented that pain and stiffness did not improve in neither groups at any time points after intervention (P > 0.05). KOOS score suggested that symptoms improved after 3 months in both CS and HA groups. Besides, daily activity improved in both groups (P < 0.05). As a conclusion, it is argued that the most important difference between the two intervention groups is the duration of effectiveness. HA is suggested to be superior in the duration of pain relief when compared to CS. We can propose that HA can be administered every 3 months intra-articular for knee joint OA. Therefore, when CS has to be injected every 2 months, it will be more convenient to use HA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 104 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 17%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 9%
Student > Master 8 8%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 27 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 30 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2023.
All research outputs
#3,927,005
of 24,618,075 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#218
of 1,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,556
of 306,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#23
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,618,075 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 306,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.