The effect of capsicum plaster in pain after inguinal hernia repair in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Capsicum plaster at a classical Chinese acupoint is an alternative to acupuncture, which has been used as a supplemental therapy to opioid analgesics for pain control during the postoperative period. We investigated the postoperative analgesic efficacy of capsicum plaster at Zusanli (ST-36) points after pediatric hernia repair. METHODS: This double-blind, sham-controlled study was designed in 108 children, aged 4 month to 9 year, undergoing unilateral hernia repair, and was randomly assigned to three treatment regimens: group Zusanli (Z)=capsicum plaster at Zusanli acupoints and placebo tape on the shoulder as a nonacupoint, group Sham (S)=capsicum plaster on the shoulders and placebo tape at Zusanli acupoints, and group control (C)=placebo tape at Zusanli acupoints and on the shoulder. The postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements during 24 h postoperatively were assessed. RESULTS: Total meperidine consumption was significantly lower in group Z (0.87+/-0.35 mg.kg-1) compared with group C (1.27+/-0.41 mg.kg-1) and S (1.22+/-0.45 mg.kg-1) (P<0.001). The pain scores on both the objective pain scale (OPS) and the Children Hospital of Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS), were significantly lower in group Z compared with the other groups at 6 and 24 h postoperatively, but not at the 10 min and 1 h postoperative time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of capsicum plaster at the Zusanli points reduces pain and postoperative opioid consumption in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair, but not in the first six postoperative hours.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".