MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026692964 · doi:10.1185/030079904x12951

Lidocaine patch 5% and its positive impact on pain qualities in osteoarthritis: results of a pilot 2-week, open-label study using the Neuropathic Pain Scale

2004· article· en· W2026692964 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLidocaineNeuropathic painAnalgesicAdverse effectOsteoarthritisAnesthesiaVisual analogue scalePopulationRandomized controlled trialSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of the lidocaine patch 5% on distinct pain qualities associated with osteoarthritis (OA) through use of the Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS), an assessment tool designed to assess intensity of various pain qualities (i.e.sharp, dull). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a prospective, open-label, non-randomized, parallel-group, 2-week study involving 8 clinical trial sites in the United States. Eligible patients had radiographic evidence of OA involving one or both knees and reported moderate-to-severe pain (despite prn or stable doses of analgesics) on the NPS at study enrollment. Patients on prn analgesics were discontinued from all analgesic regimens prior to study entry and received lidocaine patch 5% as monotherapy. Those on stable doses of analgesics were continued on their other analgesic regimens with no additions or dose alterations allowed other than the lidocaine patch 5% as add-on therapy. The lidocaine patch 5% was applied to the area of maximal pain, using no more than a total of 4 patches changed every 24 h. Effectiveness was measured by change from baseline to Week 2 in 4 composite measures of the NPS: NPS-10, NPS-4, NPS-8, and NPS-nonallodynia. Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs), dermal assessment of application site(s), and skin sensory testing. RESULTS: In the combined patient population (n = 100), 2 weeks of treatment with lidocaine patch 5% significantly improved all 4 NPS composite measures (p < 0.001). Separate analyses by subgroups revealed significant improvements in all 4 composite measures for both the monotherapy group (n = 12; p < 0.01) and add-on therapy group (n = 88; p < 0.001). No treatment-related AEs were reported for the monotherapy group. In the add-on therapy group, 5 patients experienced mild-to-moderate treatment-related AEs. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate-to-severe OA of the knee, 2 weeks of treatment with the lidocaine patch 5% significantly reduces the intensity of pain qualities as measured by all 4 NPS composite measures. Our results coincide with previously reported improvements in pain and physical function in the same patient population, as measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index. Measuring the various qualities of pain appears to be a valid approach for assessing clinical outcomes in the treatment of OA pain. Pain measures such as the NPS can capture the multi-dimensional properties of a patient's pain experience and may offer clinicians the possibility to identify differential effects of analgesic treatments on various pain qualities associated with OA.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.255 · 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