MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994453326 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000000688

Will the Real Benefits of Single-Shot Interscalene Block Please Stand Up? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2015· review· en· W1994453326 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 · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Western HospitalWomen's College HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVisual analogue scaleAnalgesicConfidence intervalAnesthesiaNauseaRandomized controlled trialVomitingPatient satisfactionMeta-analysisSurgeryPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Interscalene block (ISB) can provide pain relief after shoulder surgery, but a reliable quantification of its analgesic benefits is lacking. This meta-analysis examines the effect of single-shot ISB on analgesic outcomes during the first 48 hours after shoulder surgery. METHODS: We retrieved randomized and quasirandomized controlled trials examining the analgesic benefits of ISB compared with none in shoulder surgery. Severity of postoperative pain measured on a visual analog scale (10 cm scale, 0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain) at rest at 24 hours was the designated primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included pain severity at rest and with motion at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 32, 36, 40, and 48 hours postoperatively. Opioid consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting, patient satisfaction with pain relief, and postanesthesia care unit and hospital discharge time were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 23 randomized controlled trials, including 1090 patients, were analyzed. Patients in the ISB group had more severe postoperative pain at rest by a weighed mean difference (95% confidence interval) of 0.96 cm (0.08-1.83; P = 0.03) at 24 hours compared with no ISB, but there was no difference in pain severity beyond that point. The duration of pain relief at rest and with motion after ISB were 8 and 6 hours, respectively, with a corresponding weighed mean difference in visual analog scale pain scores (99% confidence interval) of -1.59 cm (-2.60 to -0.58) and -2.20 cm (-4.34 to -0.06), respectively, with no additional pain relief benefits beyond these points. ISB reduced postoperative opioid consumption up to 12 hours, decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting at 24 hours, and expedited postanesthesia care unit and hospital discharge. The type, dose, and volume of local anesthetic used did not affect the results. CONCLUSIONS: ISB can provide effective analgesia up to 6 hours with motion and 8 hours at rest after shoulder surgery, with no demonstrable benefits thereafter. Patients who receive an ISB can suffer rebound pain at 24 hours but later experience similar pain severity compared with those who do not receive an ISB. ISB can also provide an opioid-sparing effect and reduce opioid-related side effects in the first 12 and 24 hours postoperatively, respectively. These findings are useful to inform preoperative risk-benefit discussions regarding ISB for shoulder surgery.

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)0.003
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: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.213 · 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