MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969556811 · doi:10.1100/2012/273821

Impact of a Preemptive Multimodal Analgesia plus Femoral Nerve Blockade Protocol on Rehabilitation, Hospital Length of Stay, and Postoperative Analgesia after Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Controlled Clinical Pilot Study

2012· article· en· W1969556811 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren A Beaupré, D. Bill C. Johnston, S. Dieleman, Ban C. H. Tsui

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Scientific World JOURNAL · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersFondation pour la Recherche Médicale
KeywordsMedicineTotal knee arthroplastyFemoral nerveRehabilitationAnesthesiaArthroplastyBlockadePain managementProtocol (science)Physical therapySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To compare preemptive multimodal analgesia (PMMA) without femoral nerve blocks (FNB) to PMMA including FNB following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: In a prospective, controlled pilot study, subjects with noninflammatory arthritis undergoing TKA and a short postoperative stay received either PMMA + FNB (FNB group; n = 19) or PMMA only (PMMA group; n = 20). No preoperative group differences were noted. Evaluations occurred in hospital and at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively. The primary outcome (knee flexion) was measured on day two postoperatively. Rehabilitation indices, pain, analgesic use, and length of stay (LOS) were also measured. RESULTS: All subjects completed the study. The only significant group differences were quadriceps motor blocks in the FNB group (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in ROM, pain levels, analgesic use, or hospital LOS. CONCLUSION: Other than the quadriceps motor block, no group differences were noted; both achieved satisfactory analgesia. Best postoperative pain management strategies when following a short hospital stay program are still unclear.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Scientific World JOURNALSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207