The Impact of Analgesic Modality on Early Ambulation Following Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Total knee arthroplasty is associated with moderate to severe pain, and effective analgesia is essential to facilitate postoperative recovery. This retrospective cohort study examined the analgesic and rehabilitation outcomes associated with 48-hour continuous femoral nerve block, local infiltration analgesia, or local infiltration analgesia plus adductor canal nerve block. METHODS: Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia, during an 8-month period, were retrospectively assessed with a targeted review of 100 patients per group. Records of eligible patients were reviewed to identify the analgesic technique used and the primary outcome of distance walked on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included ambulation on days 2 and 3, numeric rating scale pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse effects and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-eight eligible patients were reviewed. Local infiltration analgesia and local infiltration plus adductor canal block were associated with longer distances walked on postoperative day 1 than continuous femoral nerve block (median values of 20, 30, and 0 m, respectively; P < 0.0001). The addition of adductor canal block was associated with further improvement in early ambulation benchmarks and a higher rate of home discharge compared with only local infiltration (88.2% vs 73.2%, P = 0.018). Local infiltration with or without adductor canal block was associated with lower pain scores at rest and during movement for the first 24 hours and lower opioid consumption than continuous femoral nerve infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Local infiltration analgesia was associated with improved early analgesia and ambulation. The addition of adductor canal nerve block was associated with further improvements in early ambulation and a higher incidence of home discharge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".