Incidence of self‐limiting back pain in children following caudal blockade: an exploratory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, in pediatric anesthesia, there is no evidence-based information available to pediatric patients and their parents regarding the incidence of back pain after neuraxial injections performed for postoperative analgesia. Back pain postepidural blockade has been reported in numerous studies with adult patients; however, it has not been investigated in children. The main objective of this study is to examine the incidence of back pain symptoms after caudal blockade (early and late onset) in children. METHODS: Patients under the age of 18 years, who received caudal blockade at the Montreal Children's Hospital between July 2006 and December 2008 were recruited in this prospective observational study. Back pain was measured prospectively by patient self-report and parental observation during the 15-day postoperative period. Patients, or their parents, were contacted by phone on postoperative day 2 (POD2) and postoperative day 15 (POD15) to answer a seven-item symptom questionnaire. RESULTS: In a sample of 135 children, the incidence of back pain symptoms was 4.7% and 1.1% on POD2 and POD15, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide support that transient self-limiting back pain after caudal blockade does occur in pediatric patients. Clinically, this is useful information for physicians to provide to their patients. An exploration of factors that may be associated with back pain following caudal blockade in children is an interesting area of future research.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".