Correlates of Postoperative Pain and Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia Use in Younger and Older Surgical Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Age-related patterns in postoperative pain are unclear with reports of no age differences and less pain with age. The objective of this study was to identify correlates of pain and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (i.v. PCA) morphine use in younger and older patients. DESIGN: 24 hours after surgery, patients completed measures of pain intensity and pain qualities. Surgical factors, i.v. PCA morphine intake, anticholinergic load, polypharmacy, physical status, previous chronic and postoperative pain, and PCA experience were measured. SETTING: Two academic general hospitals. PATIENTS. Two hundred forty-six general surgery patients ranging in age from 18 to 82 years old. RESULTS: In older patients, higher pain scores were associated with female gender and previous experience of postoperative PCA. In younger patients, higher pain scores were associated with female gender, previous surgery without PCA, and greater morphine intake. Lower pain was associated with being male, and no previous surgical experience in older patients, and lower morphine intake in younger patients. Morphine intake was higher in patients who were younger, had better physical status, higher anticholinergic load, and experience with PCA. Among younger patients, increased morphine use also was associated with surgical procedure and duration. Higher pain scores were more strongly associated with morphine use among younger than older patients. CONCLUSIONS: The correlates of postoperative pain and morphine use may differ with age, and the same factor may have different effects across age groups. Research is needed into the mechanisms of these age-specific profiles.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".