Pain management after tonsillectomy: morphine is not enough.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Tonsillectomy is usually done as day surgery, transferring to the parents most of the postoperative care. They often feel alone and incompetent in front of a child in pain. We developed a guide to help parents for both the evaluation and the management of postoperative pain. OBJECTIVE: To improve pediatric posttonsillectomy pain management with the implementation of a parental guide and treatment algorithm. METHODS: Eighty children (5-17 years) were recruited in this randomized clinical trial. Parents and children were assigned to one of the research groups: control or experimental. All received an identical prescription for acetaminophen (15 mg/kg) and morphine (0.3 mg/kg), information about the medication, a visual analogue scale (VAS), and index cards to be filled at home. The experimental group also received a treatment algorithm associating pain scores with analgesics. RESULTS: Pain scores for the control group and the experimental group were 5.3 and 4.7 on the day of surgery, 4.0 and 3.6 the next day, 2.2 and 2.3 3 days later, and 1.6 and 1.4 1 week after the intervention, respectively. The side effects and the analgesics given were comparable for both groups. CONCLUSION: No significant difference was demonstrated for the studied parameters, probably because the majority of the parents followed the prescriptions well. The guide was much appreciated. The children understood the VAS easily and liked using it. The combination of acetaminophen-morphine needs to be revisited since pain remains problematic.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".