MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phonomyography and Mechanomyography Can Be Used Interchangeably to Measure Neuromuscular Block at the Adductor Pollicis Muscle

2004· article· en· W1969390396 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Nerve Disorders
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdductor pollicis muscleMedicineAnesthesiaUlnar nerveNeuromuscular monitoringNeuromuscular BlockadeStimulationLimits of agreementInternal medicineNuclear medicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: The standard of neuromuscular monitoring is the measurement of the force of contraction (mechanomyography, MMG). Phonomyography (PMG) consists of recording low-frequency sounds created during muscle contraction. In this study, we compared and used both methods to determine neuromuscular blockade (NMB) at the adductor pollicis muscle. In 14 patients, PMG was recorded via a small condenser microphone taped to the thenar mass, and a standard mechanomyographic device was applied to the same arm. In another group of 14 patients, only PMG was measured. After induction of anesthesia, the ulnar nerve was stimulated supramaximally using single twitch stimulation (0.1 Hz) for onset and train-of-four (TOF) stimulation every 12 s during offset of NMB produced by mivacurium 0.1 mg/kg. Onset and recovery indices measured by the 2 methods were compared using Student's t-test (P < 0.05). Similar comparisons were made between the two PMG groups (with or without special board). Agreement between PMG and MMG was examined using a Bland-Altman test. Onset was 165 (68) s versus 172 (67) s [mean (SD)], and maximum blockade was 89 (10)% versus 90 (11)%, for PMG and MMG respectively (NS). Time to 25%, 75%, and 90% recovery was 16.5 (4.2) min, 22.1 (6.9) min, and 24.5 (8.2) min, respectively for PMG, not different from 16.7 (4) min, 22.8 (8.1) min, and 24.8 (8.8) min for MMG. Mean bias was 0% with limits of agreement of -10 and + 10% of twitch height for all signals (MMG minus PMG). Time to TOF of 0.5, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9, was 1 min faster with PMG than with MMG, with limits of agreement of -1.5 to 3.5 min. Pharmacodynamic data derived without or with special arm fixation were not significantly different. MMG and PMG can be used interchangeably to determine NMB at the adductor pollicis muscle. PMG is easier to apply, does not need a special monitoring board and could be a reliable monitor to determine NMB in daily routine. IMPLICATIONS: Mechanomyography and phonomyography (PMG), a novel method of monitoring neuromuscular blockade (NMB) by recording low-frequency sounds emitted by muscle contraction, can be used interchangeably to determine NMB at the adductor pollicis muscle. PMG is easier to apply, does not need a special monitoring board and could be a reliable monitor to determine NMB in daily routine.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it