Parenteral Ketamine as an Analgesic Adjuvant for Severe Pain: Development and Retrospective Audit of a Protocol for a Palliative Care Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ketamine is an effective analgesic agent for treating a variety of neuropathic and cancer pain syndromes. Recent studies indicate that ketamine may have a particular role in the management of patients with neuropathic and/or pain syndromes that are poorly responsive to opioids. OBJECTIVE: To develop, implement, and subsequently assess a protocol designed to maximize the analgesic effect of ketamine while minimizing its side effects. DESIGN: A retrospective chart audit of 16 patients who had used the ketamine protocol over a 12-month period. Criteria for assessing the effectiveness of ketamine were defined. RESULTS: Ketamine was an effective, well-tolerated analgesic adjuvant for 11 of 16 patients with previously uncontrolled pain. Pain scores were reduced by at least 4 of 10 in 15 of the 16 patients. Median opioid dose reduction on starting ketamine was 25%. CONCLUSION: The audit confirmed the safety and effectiveness of ketamine as an analgesic adjuvant for patients with severe pain. Baseline opioid dose reduction and prophylactic use of haloperidol or benzodiazepine were effective in minimizing psychotomimetic side effects.
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 | 0.095 | 0.109 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".