Long-Term Pain and Functional Disability After Total Knee Arthroplasty With and Without Single-Injection or Continuous Sciatic Nerve Block in Addition to Continuous Femoral Nerve Block
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This is a follow-up to determine long-term outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients enrolled in a previous randomized trial that found reduced postoperative pain after addition of sciatic nerve block to continuous femoral nerve block for TKA. METHODS: Physical function after TKA was evaluated at 3 and 12 months in patients (n = 89) receiving continuous femoral nerve block alone (group F), combined with a single-injection (group Fs) or continuous sciatic nerve block (group FCS) after TKA, until the second postoperative day. Physical function, stiffness, and pain were measured by using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Knee Score 12-item knee questionnaires, and visual analog scale at rest and during mobilization before TKA and 3 and 12 months afterward. Post hoc, a median split on poor functioning (WOMAC) was analyzed. RESULTS: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Oxford Knee Score 12-item knee, and visual analog scale scores improved significantly in all patients, without any differences among groups. Median (range) WOMAC at 3 months were in group F, 83 (20-97); group Fs, 72 (25-99); and group, FCS 76 (28-100) and at 12 months 87 (35-98), 77 (43-100), and 89 (35-100), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No differences were detected in the secondary outcomes we examined. Thus, improved postoperative outcome did not translate into improved functional outcome or long-term pain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".