MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139293286 · doi:10.1097/aln.0b013e31820fc7d2

Optimized Perioperative Analgesia Reduces Chronic Phantom Limb Pain Intensity, Prevalence, and Frequency

2011· article· en· W2139293286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Μενέλαος Καρανικόλας, Διαμάντω Αρέθα, Ioannis A. Tsolakis, G. Monantera, Panagiotis Kiekkas, Spyros Papadoulas, Robert A. Swarm, Kriton S. Filos

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeAnesthesiaVisual analogue scalePatient-controlled analgesiaAnalgesicSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Severe preamputation pain is associated with phantom limb pain (PLP) development in limb amputees. We investigated whether optimized perioperative analgesia reduces PLP at 6-month follow-up. METHODS: A total of 65 patients underwent lower-limb amputation and were assigned to five analgesic regimens: (1) Epi/Epi/Epi patients received perioperative epidural analgesia and epidural anesthesia; (2) PCA/Epi/Epi patients received preoperative intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), postoperative epidural analgesia, and epidural anesthesia; (3) PCA/Epi/PCA patients received perioperative intravenous PCA and epidural anesthesia; (4) PCA/GA/PCA patients received perioperative intravenous PCA and general anesthesia (GA); (5) controls received conventional analgesia and GA. Epidural analgesia or intravenous PCA started 48 h preoperatively and continued 48 h postoperatively. The results of the visual analog scale and the McGill Pain Questionnaire were recorded perioperatively and at 1 and 6 months. RESULTS: At 6 months, median (minimum-maximum) PLP and P values (intervention groups vs. control group) for the visual analog scale were as follows: 0 (0-20) for Epi/Epi/Epi (P = 0.001), 0 (0-42) for PCA/Epi/Epi (P = 0.014), 20 (0-40) for PCA/Epi/PCA (P = 0.532), 0 (0-30) for PCA/GA/PCA (P = 0.008), and 20 (0-58) for controls. The values for the McGill Pain Questionnaire were as follows: 0 (0-7) for Epi/Epi/Epi (P < 0.001), 0 (0-9) for PCA/Epi/Epi (P = 0.003), 6 (0-11) for PCA/Epi/PCA (P = 0.208), 0 (0-9) for PCA/GA/PCA (P = 0.003), and 7 (0-15) for controls. At 6 months, PLP was present in 1 of 13 Epi/Epi/Epi, 4 of 13 PCA/Epi/Epi, and 3 of 13 PCA/GA/PCA patients versus 9 of 12 control patients (P = 0.001, P = 0.027, and P = 0.009, respectively). Residual limb pain at 6 months was insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Optimized epidural analgesia or intravenous PCA, starting 48 h preoperatively and continuing for 48 h postoperatively, decreases PLP at 6 months.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations200
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207