MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004799551 · doi:10.1097/aap.0b013e3181ad6e23

Comparison of 3 Intensities of Stimulation Threshold for Brachial Plexus Blocks at the Midhumeral Level

2009· article· en· W2004799551 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Cuvillon, Nicolas Dion, Michel Deleuze, Emmanuel Nouvellon, Aba Mahamat, J L'Hermite, Christophe Boisson, Nathalie Vialles, Jacques Ripart, Jean E. de La Coussaye

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMusculocutaneous nerveBrachial plexusRadial nerveAnesthesiaStimulationUlnar nerveRopivacaineBrachial plexus blockMedian nerveSurgeryInternal medicineElbow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We conducted this prospective randomized study to compare the success rate and the onset time between 3 intensities of stimulation threshold (<0.5, 0.5-0.64, and 0.65-0.8 mA) when using a peripheral nerve stimulation at the midhumeral level. METHODS: Sixty-nine adult patients undergoing elective hand surgery were studied. Blocks were performed using conventional nerve stimulation technique. Needle advance began at 2 mA (1 Hz, 0.1 millisecond). When motor response (MR) occurred at less than 0.5 mA, needle position was fixed for "group <0.5 mA." For "group 0.5-0.64 mA," the needle was withdrawn until MR occurred at greater than 0.5 mA and disappeared at less than 0.5 mA. For "group >0.65 mA," the needle was withdrawn until MR occurred at greater than 0.65 mA and disappeared at less than 0.65 mA. For each group, patients received 8 mL of ropivacaine 7.5 mg/mL on the 4 nerves (radial, median, ulnar, and musculocutaneous). Primary end point was the number of failed radial nerve sensory blocks at 30 mins. RESULTS: The time to perform the block was not different between the 3 groups (17 mins [SD, 7 mins] vs 13 mins [SD, 8 mins] and 13 mins [SD, 4 mins], respectively). The time required to obtain a complete sensory block was shorter for the 4 nerves in group <0.5 mA, with a statistical significance for radial and musculocutaneous nerves in group <0.5 mA versus group 0.5-0.64 mA and group >0.65 mA. Patients in group <0.5 mA had a greater success rate for complete sensory radial nerve compared with those of group 0.5-0.64 mA and group >0.65 mA at any interval times between 5 and 30 mins (P = 0.0001). Supplemental local anesthesia was provided for the 3 groups more frequently for the median nerve, with no difference between groups. Group >0.65 mA required 5 general anesthesias (20%) as compared with 1 (4%) in group <0.5 mA (P < 0.05). No adverse event (dysesthesia) occurred after 48 hrs and 45 days. CONCLUSION: We conclude that intensity of stimulation influenced onset time and success rate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegional Anesthesia & Pain MedicineSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207