A PRP visit begins by checking why you are sore

Guided exercise and simpler care often come first

The name PRP means platelet-rich plasma, made by separating your blood and keeping plasma with platelets, blood cells that start clotting at a wound. An exam still comes first.

People often discuss PRP after guided exercise, activity changes, a brace, or medicine hasn't eased the soreness enough. You may not need every one, because your health, past care, and exam can rule some out before you spend money on a shot.

At QC Kinetix, regenerative treatments mean its clinicians examine you before the clinic prepares a blood-based option for the sore area. They'll explain whether other care belongs first.

Brief aching is common, but warning signs matter

The sore area may ache or swell for a short time after PRP. You'll want the clinic's after-care advice before leaving.

Tell the clinician about blood thinners, aspirin, recent infections, or bleeding trouble. Only the doctor who gave you a medicine can advise changing it.

Fast-growing soreness, fever, spreading redness, warmth, or drainage calls for prompt medical care. Those signs aren't part of the expected recovery.

Fever or sudden weakness needs prompt care

A joint that is hot, badly swollen, and joined by fever isn't a routine PRP concern. Being unable to bear weight also needs prompt care.

New numbness, weakness, or loss of bladder or bowel control needs urgent help. So does a pop followed by major loss of movement.

These signs can come from infection, a broken bone, a torn tendon, or nerve trouble. Please seek urgent care instead of waiting.

Sources

1. The ESSKA-ICRS consensus applied the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method to 216 clinical scenarios for intra-articular PRP in knee OA. Only 84 scenarios (38.9%) were rated appropriate, 9 (4.2%) inappropriate and 123 (56.9%) uncertain. PRP was judged appropriate in patients aged 80 or under with KL grade 0-III osteoarthritis AFTER failed conservative non-injective or injective treatment; it was NOT considered appropriate as a first treatment, nor in KL grade IV (bone-on-bone) osteoarthritis, where 91.7% and 87.5% of scenarios respectively were uncertain.

   Kon E, de Girolamo L, Laver L, et al. — Platelet-rich plasma injections for the management of knee osteoarthritis: The ESSKA-ICRS consensus. Recommendations using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method for different clinical scenarios. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2024. DOI: 10.1002/ksa.12320.

2. A study training predictive models on imaging features found that neither radiographic grading (IRF) nor MRI-based MOAKS scoring predicted patient pain or symptoms in knee osteoarthritis - the best model reached an R-squared of only 0.28, and predictive performance got WORSE as symptoms got more severe. An X-ray grade is not a prediction of how much someone hurts, and it is not on its own a reason to treat or not treat.

   Hill BG, Eble S, Moschetti WE, et al. — The Discordance Between Pain and Imaging in Knee Osteoarthritis. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2025. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-00509.

3. The 2019 ACR/Arthritis Foundation osteoarthritis guideline makes STRONG recommendations for exercise, weight loss in people with overweight or obesity, self-management programmes, tai chi, cane use, tibiofemoral bracing, topical and oral NSAIDs and intra-articular glucocorticoid injections for knee OA. Its conditional recommendations cover balance exercises, yoga, CBT, acupuncture, thermal modalities, radiofrequency ablation, acetaminophen, duloxetine and tramadol. Anything offered before a course of the strongly recommended options is being offered out of order.

   Kolasinski SL, Neogi T, Hochberg MC, et al. — 2019 American College of Rheumatology/Arthritis Foundation Guideline for the Management of Osteoarthritis of the Hand, Hip, and Knee. Arthritis & Rheumatology, 2020. DOI: 10.1002/art.41142.

4. A systematic review of 105 clinical PRP studies in orthopaedics published 2006-2016 found that only 11 (10%) described the preparation protocol clearly enough for another investigator to repeat it, and only 17 (16%) reported any quantitative metric of the final PRP composition. The authors concluded that the current reporting of PRP preparation and composition does not allow the PRP products actually delivered to patients to be compared between studies.

   Chahla J, Cinque ME, Piuzzi NS, et al. — A Call for Standardization in Platelet-Rich Plasma Preparation Protocols and Composition Reporting: A Systematic Review of the Clinical Orthopaedic Literature. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American), 2017. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01374.

5. The Cochrane review of STEM CELL injections for knee osteoarthritis concluded that on low-certainty evidence they may slightly improve pain and function, with uncertainty about effects on quality of life, treatment success and structural progression, and uncertainty about safety. This matters on a PRP site because 'stem cell therapy' is routinely used as a marketing label for PRP; they are different products with different evidence and PRP must never be described as a stem cell treatment.

   Whittle SL, Johnston RV, McDonald S, et al. — Stem cell injections for osteoarthritis of the knee. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2025. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013342.pub2.

6. In the RESTORE trial - the largest placebo-controlled PRP trial in knee osteoarthritis - 288 adults aged 50+ with symptomatic Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2-3 medial knee OA received three weekly intra-articular injections of leukocyte-poor PRP from a commercial system or saline placebo. At 12 months the mean change in knee pain was -2.1 points with PRP versus -1.8 with saline (difference -0.4; 95% CI -0.9 to 0.2; P=.17) against a minimum clinically important difference of 1.8, and the change in medial tibial cartilage volume was -1.4% versus -1.2% (difference -0.2%; 95% CI -1.9% to 1.5%; P=.81). Twenty-nine of 31 prespecified secondary outcomes showed no significant between-group difference. The authors concluded the findings do not support use of PRP for knee OA.

   Bennell KL, Paterson KL, Metcalf BR, et al. — Effect of Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma vs Placebo Injection on Pain and Medial Tibial Cartilage Volume in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: The RESTORE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA, 2021. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.19415.

7. An updated meta-analysis of six randomized trials (422 patients) found no benefit of PRP over placebo for Achilles tendinopathy on VISA-A at 3 months (mean difference 1.7; 95% CI -1.8 to 5.2), 6 months (0.5; 95% CI -8.5 to 9.3) or 1 year (-7.9; 95% CI -27.3 to 11.6), nor on VAS pain at 3 months. Funnel-plot asymmetry suggested publication bias inflating apparent benefits. The authors wrote that PRP should not be used to treat Achilles tendinopathy until high-quality trials show a clear clinical benefit.

   Barreto ESR, Antunes Junior CR, Silva IC, et al. — Is Platelet-rich Plasma Effective in Treating Achilles Tendinopathy? A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2025. DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003349.