Threshold Current for an Insulated Epidural Needle in Pediatric Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief We designed this study to determine the threshold current for nerve stimulation of an insulated needle in the epidural space. The intended dermatome was identified using the bony landmarks of the spine. An 18-gauge insulated Tuohy needle was inserted perpendicularly to the skin and advanced until “loss of resistance” was felt. A nerve stimulator was then connected to the insulated needle. Twenty patients were studied using an insulated Tuohy needle and one patient was studied using a noninsulated Tuohy needle. Muscle twitch was elicited with a current of 11.1 ± 3.1 mA (mean ± sd) in all patients in which an insulated needle was used. Muscle twitches were within 2 myotomes of the intended level (based on bony landmarks). Muscle twitch was not elicited with a noninsulated needle. After catheter threading, positive stimulation tests were elicited via epidural catheters in all patients (4.9 ± 2.3 mA). Postoperative radiograph confirmed all catheter placements within 2 myotomes of the muscle twitches. Electrical stimulation may be a useful adjuvant tool to loss of resistance for confirming proper thoracic epidural needle placement. The threshold current criteria for an insulated needle (6–17 mA) would be higher than the original Tsui test criteria described for an epidural catheter (1–10 mA) in the epidural space. IMPLICATIONS: Electrical stimulation may be a useful adjuvant tool for confirming proper thoracic epidural needle placement. The threshold current for an insulated needle is higher than the original Tsui test criteria described for an epidural catheter in the epidural space.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".