Bowel function after bowel surgery: morphine with ketamine or placebo; a randomized controlled trial pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Morphine decreases gut peristalsis, and ketamine decreases morphine use after surgery, and does not slow peristalsis. Thus, the combination should result in faster return of bowel function after surgery than morphine alone. METHOD: A double-blind randomized controlled trial of saline vs. ketamine with intravenous patient-controlled-analgesia morphine for post-operative pain control was conducted on 42 patients having bowel resection. Bowel function was assessed by auscultation, time to passage of flatus and stool, and time to first retained oral intake; pain by visual analog scale. Time to return of all four measures of bowel function was the primary outcome. RESULTS: Despite a ketamine dose that in other studies had decreased morphine use without side-effects, there was no difference in bowel function, pain control, or morphine use between the two groups. Ketamine resulted in hallucinations in six out of 19 patients, with none in the placebo group (P =0.018). CONCLUSION: Low-dose ketamine was not efficacious for hastening return of bowel function, or for decreasing post-operative pain after surgery for bowel resection. It resulted in hallucinations in some patients. Those reporting hallucinations all wished to remain in the study.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".