Effects of preoperative administration of ketoprofen on anesthetic requirements and signs of postoperative pain in dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of preoperative administration of ketoprofen on anesthetic requirements and signs of postoperative pain in dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled clinical trial. ANIMALS: 22 clinically normal client-owned dogs. PROCEDURE: 60 minutes before induction of anesthesia, 11 dogs were given ketoprofen (2 mg/kg [0.9 mg/lb], i.m.), and the other 11 were given saline (0.9% NaCl) solution. Dogs were premedicated with glycopyrrolate, acepromazine, and butorphanol and anesthetized with thiopental; anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane. Ovariohysterectomy was performed by an experienced surgeon, and butorphanol was given 15 minutes before completion of the procedure. Objective behavioral scores and numerical pain scores at rest and with movement were recorded every 2 hours for 12 hours after surgery and then every 4 hours for an additional 12 hours. RESULTS: Preoperative administration of ketoprofen did not reduce the dose of thiopental required to induce anesthesia or the end-tidal concentration of isoflurane required to maintain anesthesia. Activity levels and median objective behavioral scores were significantly higher 4 and 6 hours after surgery in dogs given ketoprofen than in dogs given saline solution. However, mean numerical pain scores in dogs given ketoprofen were not significantly different from scores for dogs given saline solution at any time. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggest that preoperative administration of ketoprofen does not reduce anesthetic requirements in dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy but may reduce signs of pain after surgery. Results also suggest that the objective behavioral score may be a more sensitive measure of acute postoperative pain than traditional numerical pain scores.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".