An evaluation of intrathecal bupivacaine combined with intrathecal or intravenous clonidine in children undergoing orthopedic surgery: a randomized double‐blinded study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Propofol is a popular agent for providing intraoperative sedation in pediatric population during lumbar puncture and spinal anesthesia. Adjuvant-like clonidine is used increasingly in pediatric anesthesia to provide postoperative analgesia with a local anesthetic agent. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of intrathecal and intravenous clonidine on postoperative analgesia/sedation and intraoperative requirements of propofol after intrathecal bupivacaine for orthopedic surgery in children. METHODS: Fifty-nine ASA I and II children aged 6-8 year undergoing orthopedic surgery were randomized to receive intrathecal 0.5% bupivacaine 0.2-0.4 mg·kg(-1) and intravenous 2 ml saline (Group B), intrathecal 0.5% bupivacaine 0.2-0.4 mg·kg(-1) plus 1 μg·kg(-1) clonidine and intravenous 2 ml saline (Group BCit), and 0.5% bupivacaine 0.2-0.4 mg·kg(-1) and intravenous 1 μg·kg(-1) clonidine in 2 ml of saline (Group BCiv). Intraoperative sedation was maintained with 20-50 μg·kg(-1)·min(-1) of propofol infusion. The requirements of propofol, time to first rescue analgesia, and postoperative pain or sedation scores were assessed. The duration of motor and sensory blocks and perioperative adverse events were determined. RESULTS: Clonidine significantly prolonged the time to first rescue analgesia and reduced the requirements of propofol sedation whether administered intravenously or intrathecally. The mean Children and Infants Postoperative Pain Scale scores of children were significantly lower in groups BCit and BCiv than in group B. Postoperative sedation scores were higher in groups BCit and BCiv than in group B. Intrathecal clonidine significantly prolonged the time to regression of the sensory block and recovery of motor block. There were no significant differences among the three groups regarding the incidence of perioperative adverse events. CONCLUSION: Intrathecal or intravenous clonidine similarly provided better postoperative analgesia and sedation and reduced the requirements of propofol. Only intrathecal clonidine prolonged the duration of sensory and motor blocks.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".