↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Intra-articular ozone or hyaluronic acid injection: Which one is superior in patients with knee osteoarthritis? A 6-month randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
Intra-articular ozone or hyaluronic acid injection: Which one is superior in patients with knee osteoarthritis? A 6-month randomized clinical trial
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, January 2018
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s142755
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seyed Ahmad Raeissadat, Seyed Mansoor Rayegani, Bijan Forogh, Porya Hassan Abadi, Mahsa Moridnia, Shahram Rahimi Dehgolan

Abstract

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disease, imposing a great burden through pain and decreased function. There are many therapeutic modalities including non-pharmacologic choices and oral, topical, and intra-articular medications. New studies have shown promising results for ozone application in knee OA. Our aim was to compare the effects of ozone therapy versus hyaluronic acid (HA) intra-articular injection in knee OA patients. In this randomized clinical trial, a total of 174 patients with more than 3 months of chronic pain or swelling in the knee joints along with consistent imaging findings were enrolled and randomly allocated into two groups of HA and ozone, which were planned to undergo 3 weekly injections of HA (Hyalgan®) and 10 mL of a 30 μg/mL ozone solution, respectively. Patients were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after the last injection for pain, stiffness, and function using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire. No major adverse events were detected in this study. Total WOMAC score decreased from 40.8±9.8 to 20.4±4.9 (p<0.01) in the ozone group and from 38.5±7.9 to 17.1±4.2 (p<0.01) in the HA group. A similar trend was observed in pain improvement according to VAS. Pain, stiffness, and function significantly improved in both the groups, but no between-group difference was found. Although both ozone and HA can be effectively used for improving function and reducing pain in selected knee OA patients, neither of the two showed any superiority at 6-month follow-up.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Student > Master 13 11%
Other 11 10%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 44 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 47 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,482,695
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#640
of 1,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,770
of 445,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#21
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,815 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 445,160 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.