Does Ultrasound Guidance Improve the Success Rate of Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block When Compared with Nerve Stimulation in Children with Radial Club Hands?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The classical response to nerve stimulation may be altered in cases of radial club hand. Ultrasound guidance may prove to be a useful tool in such situations. In this study, we compared the success rate of ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block with nerve stimulation for children undergoing radial club hand repair. METHODS: Fifty children, aged 1-2 yr, undergoing radial club hand repair were randomly assigned to receive infraclavicular brachial plexus block guided by nerve stimulator (Group NS) or ultrasound (Group U) in combination with light general anesthetic. Bupivacaine 0.5 mL/kg of 0.5% was injected in both groups. Pain response to surgical stimulus was considered as block failure. The Children's Hospital Eastern Ontario Pain Scale pain score was recorded at 1, 4, 6, 8, and 10 postoperative hours. RESULTS: In Group NS, the blocks were successful in 16 of 25 patients (64%), whereas in Group U, 24 of 25 patients had successful blocks (P = 0.0053). There was no difference in the time to first analgesia or analgesic consumption in the 10-h study period. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block improves the success rate in patients with radial club hands when compared with nerve stimulation in patients undergoing radial club hand correction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".