Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1016/j.ocarto.2025.100697 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.ocarto.2025.100697 C12589867!12589867 !41211535     free     free     free Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=41211535 &cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215       Osteoarthr+Cartil+Open 2025 ; 7 (4 ): 100697 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=41211535 |t=2025. Comparison of three different therapeutic interventions in the management of knee osteoarthritis: Randomized controlled parallel group pilot trial |pdf=|usr=}}{{41211535 }} gab.com Text Comparison of three different therapeutic interventions in the management of knee osteoarthritis: Randomized controlled parallel group pilot trial JO: Osteoarthr Cartil Open http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=41211535 #FOAvip OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of different physical interventions on pain intensity, knee function, and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: This pilot trial involved 63 patients (45-55 ?yrs) in a rehabilitation center. Patients were randomly assigned to three groups: therapeutic exercise alone (TE, n ?= ?21), TE and cryotherapy (TE-Cr, n ?= ?21), and TE and joint mobilization (TE-JM, n ?= ?21). The primary outcome was pain intensity, secondary outcomes included knee joint function (WOMAC), muscle strength, knee joint range of motion (ROM), and quality of life (SF-36). Data were collected at baseline and after 18 days of inpatient rehabilitation. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcome at baseline. After 18 days, all intervention groups showed significant improvements (p ?< ?0.05). The TE-JM group reported lower (p ?< ?0.05) pain levels (3.24 ?± ?1.04) compared to the TE-only (4.76 ?± ?0.77) and TE-Cr (4.86 ?± ?0.57) groups. The TE-Cr group had a lower (p ?< ?0.05) SF-36 total score (52.81 ?± ?10.50) than the TE (62.00 ?± ?9.74) and TE-JM (66.62 ?± ?2.87) groups. No significant between-group differences were observed in ROM or muscle strength. The WOMAC total score was lower (p ?< ?0.05) in the TE-JM group (27.3 ?± ?13.9) compared to the TE-Cr group (40.1 ?± ?10.7). CONCLUSION: Although all three interventions had beneficial short-term effects, leading to reductions in knee pain and improvements in physical function and quality of life, but no single intervention demonstrated superior effectiveness across all assessed outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05636059. Twit Text FOAVip Comparison of three different therapeutic interventions in the management of knee osteoarthritis: Randomized controlled parallel group pilot trial ????Osteoarthr Cartil Open http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=41211535 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=41211535 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|41211535 }}</ref> Comparison of three different therapeutic interventions in the management of knee osteoarthritis: Randomized controlled parallel group pilot trial #MMPMID41211535 Dudonien? V ; Bitinas D ; ?libinait? L Osteoarthr Cartil Open 2025[Dec]; 7 (4 ): 100697 PMID41211535 show ga OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of different physical interventions on pain intensity, knee function, and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: This pilot trial involved 63 patients (45-55 ?yrs) in a rehabilitation center. Patients were randomly assigned to three groups: therapeutic exercise alone (TE, n ?= ?21), TE and cryotherapy (TE-Cr, n ?= ?21), and TE and joint mobilization (TE-JM, n ?= ?21). The primary outcome was pain intensity, secondary outcomes included knee joint function (WOMAC), muscle strength, knee joint range of motion (ROM), and quality of life (SF-36). Data were collected at baseline and after 18 days of inpatient rehabilitation. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcome at baseline. After 18 days, all intervention groups showed significant improvements (p ?< ?0.05). The TE-JM group reported lower (p ?< ?0.05) pain levels (3.24 ?± ?1.04) compared to the TE-only (4.76 ?± ?0.77) and TE-Cr (4.86 ?± ?0.57) groups. The TE-Cr group had a lower (p ?< ?0.05) SF-36 total score (52.81 ?± ?10.50) than the TE (62.00 ?± ?9.74) and TE-JM (66.62 ?± ?2.87) groups. No significant between-group differences were observed in ROM or muscle strength. The WOMAC total score was lower (p ?< ?0.05) in the TE-JM group (27.3 ?± ?13.9) compared to the TE-Cr group (40.1 ?± ?10.7). CONCLUSION: Although all three interventions had beneficial short-term effects, leading to reductions in knee pain and improvements in physical function and quality of life, but no single intervention demonstrated superior effectiveness across all assessed outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05636059. ?Comparison of three different therapeutic interventions in the managem(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing