The use of NSAIDs in pediatric scoliosis surgery – a survey of physicians’ prescribing practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric scoliosis surgery is associated with considerable postoperative pain requiring opioids for analgesia. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can be used as adjuvants for analgesia; however, the potential of these agents to affect bone healing raises concerns. No large-scale prospective studies have been performed to evaluate the benefit-to-risk ratio of NSAID use after pediatric scoliosis surgery. Given the lack of evidence in the literature, a survey of practice patterns of anesthesiologists from around the world was conducted with respect to the use of NSAIDs after pediatric spinal fusion surgery for scoliosis. METHODS: One hundred and fourteen anesthesiologists from international academic pediatric hospitals were asked to complete an online survey. After 1 month, nonresponders were sent a second e-mail asking for their participation. All questions were developed specifically for this study. RESULTS: Out of 80 anesthesiologists who responded 61 were included in the final analysis. Fifty-nine percent routinely use NSAIDs, the most common agents being intravenous ketorolac and oral ibuprofen. The majority of respondents begin to administer NSAIDs within the first three postoperative days for a duration of four or more days. The primary reason for not routinely prescribing NSAIDs was the risk of bone nonunion. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrates that the practice patterns of pediatric anesthesiologists from around the world with respect to the administration of NSAIDs for the management of postoperative pain after pediatric spinal fusion reflects the conflicting evidence in the literature and the lack of high-quality studies in humans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".