Three Doses of Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapy Are More Effective Than One Dose of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of a single dose of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with multiple doses of PRP therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from database inception to May 2022; in addition, the gray literature and bibliographic references were searched. Only randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of a single dose versus multiple doses of PRP for KOA were included. Literature retrieval and data extraction were conducted by 3 independent reviewers. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were based on type of study, research subjects, intervention, outcome, language, and availability of data. Pooled analyses of visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index scores, and adverse events were conducted. RESULTS: Seven studies (all randomized controlled trials) of high methodologic quality involving 575 patients were included. The ages of the patients included in this study ranged from 20 to 80 years, and the sex ratio was balanced. Triple-dose PRP therapy resulted in significantly better VAS scores compared with single-dose PRP therapy at 12 months (P < .0001), with no significant change in VAS scores between double-dose PRP and single-dose PRP at 12 months. Regarding adverse events, double-dose (P = .28) and triple-dose (P = .24) therapy showed no significant differences in safety from single-dose therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a paucity of large high-quality Level I studies, current best evidence suggests that 3 doses of PRP for KOA are more effective than 1 dose of PRP at providing pain relief up to 1 year after administration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of Level II studies.

A Descriptive Evaluation of Health Literacy and Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance among Patients with IgA Nephropathy with High Vaccine Uptake.

Aims: Shared decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination in IgA nephropathy involves the ability to handle health information regarding potential benefits and risk of flare, but few studies have evaluated health literacy in the context of vaccination. We aimed to evaluate the health literacy and COVID-19 vaccination uptake and acceptance in IgA nephropathy. Methods: Single-center cross-sectional study of 126 consecutive patients with IgA nephropathy. Health literacy was assessed using the HLS-EU-47 questionnaire. Determinants of vaccine acceptance such as contextual influences, individual and group influences, and vaccine-specific issues were adapted from the World Health Organization framework. Results: Forty-eight patients (38.1%) with IgAN nephropathy completed the survey between June and August 2021. The participants' median age was 40.5 (31.6, 52.8) years with median disease duration of 2.8 (1.3, 4.3) years. The median general health literacy index was 31.74 (29.88, 35.82) with significantly greater difficulty in the competency of appraising health information and in the domain of disease prevention (p < 0.001). Forty-five patients (93.8%) received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine between January and August 2021. Among the 3 unvaccinated patients, 2 intended to receive the vaccination while and 1 did not intend to get vaccinated. There was a high level of trust and belief that their government and healthcare providers had their best interests at heart and that the healthcare providers were honest about the vaccine's risk and benefits, although 31.2% did not understand how the vaccine works and 22.9% believed that there were other ways to prevent infection. Most thought there was adequate safety information, were confident in the system for tracking adverse events and had no issues with access to the vaccine. Conclusion: Participants with IgA nephropathy had high health literacy scores and low vaccine hesitancy. The determinants for vaccine acceptance can potentially guide efforts to optimize vaccination coverage.

Comparing the efficacy of dual Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA) therapy with PRP-alone therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the efficacy of a dual therapy of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA) compared with PRP-alone therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, grey literature and bibliographic references were searched from inception to January 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies comparing the effect of PRP and HA versus PRP-alone therapy for KOA were included. Literature retrieval and data extraction were conducted by three independent reviewers. Pooled analysis of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores and adverse events were conducted. RESULTS: Ten studies (7 RCTs, 3 cohort studies) involving 983 patients were covered. Dual PRP and HA therapy resulted in significant reduction in VAS compared to PRP-alone therapy at 4-6 weeks (P < 0.00001) and 12 months (P < 0.00001). Dual therapy resulted in better WOMAC score improvement at 3 (P = 0.02), 6 (P = 0.05) and 12 months (P < 0.0001) compared to PRP-alone therapy. The IKDC score for dual therapy was also higher at 6 months compared to PRP-alone therapy (P = 0.007). Regarding adverse events, dual therapy was generally safer than PRP-alone therapy (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: While there is a paucity of large high-quality Level I studies, current best evidence suggests that dual therapy with PRP and HA for KOA may be effective at providing pain relief and improvement in function up to 1 year following administration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.