MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169382924 · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e31829cfd21

The Efficacy of 2 Doses of Epidural Morphine for Postcesarean Delivery Analgesia

2013· article· en· W2169382924 on OpenAlexaff
Sudha Singh, Sarah Rehou, K. Marmai

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMorphineAnesthesiaAdverse effectOpioidOxycodoneRegimenConfidence intervalSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A single dose of epidural morphine is effective in reducing pain after cesarean delivery but is associated with adverse effects. In this study, we sought to establish whether half the traditional dose of epidural morphine, when administered as part of a multimodal analgesia regimen after cesarean delivery, was associated with noninferior analgesia and fewer adverse effects. METHODS: Ninety term parturients undergoing cesarean delivery under epidural anesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blinded, noninferiority study. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either 3 mg epidural morphine or, half this dose, 1.5 mg epidural morphine. In addition, subjects received regular systemic ketorolac and acetaminophen. Rescue analgesia (oral oxycodone) was administered for breakthrough pain. The primary outcome was the difference between groups in total opioid consumption (measured in median IV morphine equivalents) within the first 24 hours. A prespecified noninferiority margin of 3.33 mg was used. Secondary outcomes included total opioid consumption from 24 to 48 hours, numerical rating scale pain scores, time to first request for analgesics, overall pain relief, maternal satisfaction, quality of recovery, and adverse effects. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 87 participants. Noninferiority was demonstrated as the difference in median 24-hour opioid consumption between the 1.5 mg epidural morphine (EM) and 3 mg EM groups was 0 mg (1-sided 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5 mg), which was less than the prespecified noninferiority margin of 3.33 mg. No significant differences were found between groups in the median 24- to 48-hour opioid consumption or the median total opioid consumption within 48 hours. Pain scores, overall pain relief, and satisfaction at 24 and 48 hours were not significantly different between groups. The 1.5 mg EM group had a lower incidence of moderate and severe pruritus at 6 and 12 hours (relative risk [RR] 0.44, 95% CI, 0.2-0.9 and RR 0.41, 95% CI, 0.2-0.8, respectively) and had less nausea and vomiting at 6 hours (RR 0.22, 95% CI, 0.05-0.9). There was no difference in average pain scores at 12 weeks between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: When used as part of a multimodal analgesia regimen, 1.5 mg epidural morphine provided noninferior postcesarean analgesia and caused fewer adverse effects compared with 3 mg epidural morphine.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations53
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207