A retrospective audit to examine the effectiveness of preoperative warming on hypothermia in spine deformity surgery patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypothermia (core body temperature <36°C) during surgery has been associated with surgical site infection, a major risk in all spine deformity surgeries. Forced air warming is an important method of intraoperative temperature maintenance in children. In mid-2010, we empirically introduced preoperative warming as a strategy to reduce intraoperative hypothermia. OBJECTIVE: We report the prevalence and extent of hypothermia during spine deformity surgeries at our institution and evaluate the effect of the introduction of preoperative warming. METHODS: We performed a retrospective audit of temperature data in children who underwent spine deformity surgeries during two-seven-month periods: November 2011 to June 2012 and 2 years prior to this period (before preoperative warming implementation). Specifically, the following data were obtained: (i) case duration; (ii) first measured temperature; (iii) last measured temperature; (iv) percentage of case spent hypothermic; (v) number of hypothermic episodes per case, and (vi) delay between case start and time of first temperature measured. Data were compared visually and using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Confidence intervals (CI) were obtained using the Hodges-Lehmann estimator. RESULTS: Preoperative warming reduced the percentage of case duration spent hypothermic by a median of 111.1 min (P < 0.001, 95% CI 77.1-139.9 min). Additionally, it increased the first measured temperature by a median of 0.5°C (P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.3-0.7°C). The last temperature at the end of the case remained unchanged (P = 0.57, 95% CI -0.2-0.1°C). CONCLUSION: Preoperative warming of children undergoing spine deformity surgery significantly reduces the percentage of case spent hypothermic, thereby potentially reducing risk of perioperative complications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".