MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032893340 · doi:10.1097/aap.0000000000000208

Evidence for the Use of Ultrasound Imaging in Pediatric Regional Anesthesia

2015· review· en· W2032893340 on OpenAlexaff
Darren Lam, Gareth N. Corry, Ban C. H. Tsui

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyRandomized controlled trialSystematic reviewMEDLINEPopulationRandomizationEvidence-based medicineLocal anestheticUltrasoundIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicinePathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An earlier review to evaluate the quality and outcomes of studies assessing ultrasound imaging in regional anesthesia for the pediatric population considered articles published from 1994 to 2009 and showed some evidence in support of block-related outcomes (block onset, success, duration) and process-related outcomes (performance time, local anesthetic dose, and spread). At that time, strong evidence in the form of randomized controlled trials and well-designed prospective observational studies was limited, leading to a call for additional research. The current systematic review (2009-2014) compares and updates the evidence for ultrasound-guided pediatric regional anesthesia published since our last review. Using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, we included in this review studies examining ultrasound imaging for nerve localization in the pediatric population between 2009 and March 2014 (meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, controlled studies without randomization, observational studies, comparative studies, and case series involving at least 10 patients). In the current review, we identified 24 and 13 articles evaluating peripheral nerve blocks and neuraxial anesthesia, respectively. WHAT'S NEW: Studies in the current review provide stronger evidence and have addressed a number of outcomes that were previously inconsistent or lacked strength in evidence. In the current systematic review, we identified more studies in a shorter period compared with the previous review, and these studies contain higher levels of evidence compared with what we previously found. Randomized controlled trials and well-designed prospective observational studies have replaced case series. Stronger evidence from the literature suggests that ultrasound-guided peripheral blocks decrease block performance time when compared with nerve stimulation (but take longer than the landmark technique), increase block success, and increase block quality (as measured by analgesic consumption, block duration, and pain scores). Ultrasound guidance in neuraxial blocks improves needling time, predicts epidural depth, allows visualization of the catheter and local anesthetic spread, and improves block quality. Furthermore, we identified 2 large-scale prospective studies describing the incidence of adverse events and complications in pediatric regional anesthesia. The increase in evidence presented in this review reflects the efficacy and prevalent use of ultrasound imaging in pediatric regional anesthesia.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.121 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations122
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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