Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lumbar Intradiskal Platelet‐Rich Plasma (PRP) Injections: A Prospective, Double‐Blind, Randomized Controlled Study

Tuakli‐Wosornu, Yetsa A., Terry, Alon, Boachie‐Adjei, Kwadwo, Harrison, Julian R., Gribbin, Caitlin K., LaSalle, Elizabeth E., Nguyen, Joseph T., Solomon, Jennifer L., Lutz, Gregory E.·2016·PM&R

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether single injections of autologous platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) into symptomatic degenerative intervertebral disks will improve participant‐reported pain and function. Design: Prospective, double‐blind, randomized controlled study. Setting: Outpatient physiatric spine practice. Participants: Adults with chronic (≥6 months), moderate‐to‐severe lumbar diskogenic pain that was unresponsive to conservative treatment. Methods: Participants were randomized to receive intradiskal PRP or contrast agent after provocative diskography. Data on pain, physical function, and participant satisfaction were collected at 1 week, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Participants in the control group who did not improve at 8 weeks were offered the option to receive PRP and subsequently followed. Main Outcome Measures: Functional Rating Index (FRI), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, the pain and physical function domains of the 36‐item Short Form Health Survey, and the modified North American Spine Society (NASS) Outcome Questionnaire were used. Results: Forty‐seven participants (29 in the treatment group, 18 in the control group) were analyzed by an independent observer with a 92% follow‐up rate. Over 8 weeks of follow‐up, there were statistically significant improvements in participants who received intradiskal PRP with regards to pain (NRS Best Pain) (P = .02), function (FRI) (P = .03), and patient satisfaction (NASS Outcome Questionnaire) (P = .01) compared with controls. No adverse events of disk space infection, neurologic injury, or progressive herniation were reported following the injection of PRP. Conclusion: Participants who received intradiskal PRP showed significant improvements in FRI, NRS Best Pain, and NASS patient satisfaction scores over 8 weeks compared with controls. Those who received PRP maintained significant improvements in FRI scores through at least 1 year of follow‐up. Although these results are promising, further studies are needed to define the subset of participants most likely to respond to biologic intradiskal treatment and the ideal cellular characteristics of the intradiskal PRP injectate.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.08.010

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Cited by

See all 269

Metadata

Authors
Tuakli‐Wosornu, Y. A., Terry, A., Boachie‐Adjei, K., Harrison, J. R., Gribbin, C. K., LaSalle, E. E., Nguyen, J. T., Solomon, J. L., & Lutz, G. E.
Venue
PM&R
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-08-24
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
1-10
ISSN
  • 1934-1482 (ISSN-L)
  • 1934-1563
OpenAlex
W1577428593
Cited by
269
References
31
FWCI
11.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Lumbar Intradiskal Platelet‐Rich Plasma (PRP) Injections: A Prospective, Double‐Blind, Randomized Controlled Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.08.010
The paper
Tuakli‐Wosornu, Y. A., Terry, A., Boachie‐Adjei, K., Harrison, J. R., Gribbin, C. K., LaSalle, E. E., Nguyen, J. T., Solomon, J. L., & Lutz, G. E. (2016). Lumbar Intradiskal Platelet‐Rich Plasma (PRP) Injections: A Prospective, Double‐Blind, Randomized Controlled Study. PM&R. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.08.010

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.