Evaluation of adding preoperative or postoperative rectal paracetamol to caudal bupivacaine for postoperative analgesia in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our aim was to investigate whether effects of caudal analgesia could be extended by preoperative or postoperative rectal paracetamol administration in children undergoing surgical repair of hypospadias. METHODS: The group consisted of 60 ASA I boys, aged 3-12 years, who were operated for surgical repair of hypospadias. The patients were randomized into three groups: patients in group I received rectal paracetamol (20-25 mg x kg(-1)) just before the operation. Group II received only caudal bupivacaine. Group III patients received rectal paracetamol (20-25 mg x kg(-1)) at the end of the operation. Pain was assessed by Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS) and the degree of sedation was evaluated. During the first 24 h, time to the patients' first analgesic requirement and the number of supplementary analgesics needed were recorded. RESULTS: There was no difference between the demographic and haemodynamic data of the three groups. In addition, the duration of surgery and anaesthesia, pain scores and sedation scores of the groups were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of preoperative or postoperative rectal paracetamol in the doses used did not show an effect on the duration and intensity of postoperative analgesia obtained by caudal bupivacaine.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".