MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2143642373 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v6n1p207

The Postoperative Analgesic Effect of Morphine and Paracetamol in the Patients Undergoing Laparotomy, Using PCA Method

2013· article· en· W2143642373 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Siamak Yaghoubi, Reza Pourfallah, Ameneh Barikani, Hamid Kayalha

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQazvin University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsShahidMedicineMorphineAnalgesicLaparotomyAnesthesiaNauseaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: postoperative pain increases the activity of the sympathetic system, causes hypermetabolic conditions, retains salt and water, increases glucose, fatty acid lactate and oxygen consumption, weakens the immunity system which delays wound healing. Our object was comparison of the analgesic effect of morphine and paracetamol in the patients undergoing laparotomy, using PCA method. METHOD: Seventy patients who had undergone laparotomy were studied using double blind randomized clinical trial (35 patients received morphine and 35 paracetamol) in the Shahid Rajaee Center and Velayat Hospital (Qazvin, Iran). People using opioids, painkillers and sedatives regularly and in large doses and patients with a history of lung or liver problems did not participate in this project. The parameters of the severity of pain and nausea (VAS), hemodynamic changes (BP and HR), pruritus, arterial oxygen desaturation and patient satisfaction (VAS) of both groups were measured by a third party (trained colleague). The data was analyzed using SPSS 16 statistical software then descriptive results were extracted and ultimately the groups were compared using the following statistical tests: student's T-test, chi 2 and Fisher's exact test (P<0.05). FINDINGS: The mean age of the participants was 45±12.5 years. Women constituted 24.3% of the patients and men 75.7%. The average pain severity for morphine and paracetamol groups (VAS) was 5.3±2.2and 6.37±1.7 after2 hours and reached 1.91±1.3 and 2.49±1.3 after 8 hours (after the operation) respectively. There was a significant difference between the groups after 2 and 4 hours in terms of pain severity (after 2 hours P=0.007 and after 4 hours P=0.047). However there was no significant difference between the average pain severity of the studied groups (after 6 hours P=0.4 and 8 hours P=0.08). After 8 hours, the average nausea severity was the minimum in both groups being 1.71±1.6 and 1.43±1.1 in morphine and paracetamol groups respectively. Nausea severity was higher after 2 hours in paracetamol group. In morphine group, it was higher after 4, 6 and 8 hours. Difference between the groups was not significant. The average satisfaction level (VAS) for morphine and paracetamol groups reached from 5.29±2.3 and 4.2±2.4 after 2 hours, to 7.94±1.8 and 7.69±2.1 after 8 hours (after the operation), respectively. The average satisfaction level of patients was higher in morphine group in 2,4,6 and 8 hours and except for, after 4 hours (P=0.01), the satisfaction difference between both groups was not significant in other hours (P=0.06 after 2 hours, P=0.6 after 6 hours and P=0.5 after 8 hours) CONCLUSION: Morphine seems to be more effective at 2 and 4 hours, but after 4 hours they have similar effects, the satisfaction difference between both groups was not significant in the patients.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health Science→Same topicAnesthesia and Pain Management→French-language works237,207→