MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ultrasound-guided sciatic nerve block in infants and toddlers produces successful anesthesia regardless of the motor response

2010· article· en· W2148692943 on OpenAlexaff
Vrushali Ponde, Ankit P. Desai, Shalini Dhir

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Anesthesia · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaMotor blockSciatic nerveNerve blockUltrasoundSpinal anesthesiaRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to assess the success rate of ultrasound-guided sciatic needle placement regardless of the motor stimulation in infants and toddlers. METHODS: Forty-five consecutive patients aged 7 months-2 years, scheduled for foot surgery, were included in this prospective, descriptive and blinded study. After induction of general anesthesia, sciatic nerve block was performed under ultrasound guidance in the subgluteal area using an insulated needle connected to a nerve stimulator, with the power off. At the precise point when it was presumed that the needle was touching the sciatic nerve, the peripheral nerve stimulator was turned on at 0.5 mA and the current was slowly decreased to 0.2 mA. Presence and location of any motor responses were observed and recorded. Statistical analysis was applied to compare the success rate in patients who did and did not exhibit a motor response to electrical stimulation. Postoperatively, block duration and analgesic consumption were recorded. RESULTS: The sciatic nerve could be distinctly visualized in 44 children, and all these blocks were successful. Only 22% patients showed any motor response to electrical stimulation. There was no significant difference in block characteristics between patients who exhibited a motor response with electrical stimulation and those who did not. CONCLUSION: Success rate of ultrasound-guided sciatic nerve block remains unaltered irrespective of motor response to neurostimulation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric AnesthesiaSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207