MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321694226 · doi:10.1097/eja.0000000000000119

Spinal ultrasound versus palpation for epidural catheter insertion in labour

2014· article· en· W2321694226 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cristián Arzola, Rafeek Mikhael, Clarita B. Margarido, Jose C. A. Carvalho

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePalpationUltrasoundCatheterContext (archaeology)Tuohy needleInterquartile rangeLumbarSonographerSurgeryAnesthesiaRadiologySeldinger technique

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound imaging of the spine is thought to reduce failed and traumatic neuraxial procedures. Most of the evidence supporting this assumption has been produced in the context of an expert sonographer performing the ultrasound assessment, and it remains unknown whether this technique is useful when used by multiple individual operators. OBJECTIVE: To invesstigate the impact of preprocedural spinal ultrasound on the ease of insertion of labour epidurals by a group of trainees. We hypothesised that the ultrasound-assisted technique would improve the ease of insertion when compared with the conventional palpation technique. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: A group of 17 second-year anaesthesia residents and five anaesthesia fellows underwent a training programme in ultrasound assessment of the spine. Parturients with easily palpable lumbar spines were randomised to either ultrasound or palpation group. Residents and fellows performed both the assessment (ultrasound or palpation) and the epidural procedure. PRIMARY OUTCOME: ease of insertion of epidural catheter composed of the time taken to insert the epidural catheter, number of interspace levels attempted and number of needle passes. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: total procedural time (assessment and insertion); first pass success rate; number of attempts required to thread the epidural catheter; failure of epidural analgesia; and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: We analysed 128 epidural catheter insertions (residents 84, fellows 44). There was no difference in median (interquartile range, IQR) epidural insertion time between the ultrasound and palpation groups [174 (120 to 241) versus 180 (130 to 322.5) s, respectively; P = 0.14]. The number of interspace levels attempted and needle passes were also similar in both groups. The total procedural time was longer in the ultrasound group. CONCLUSION: The use of preprocedural spinal ultrasound by a cohort of anaesthesia trainees did not improve the ease of insertion of labour epidural catheters in patients with easily palpable lumbar spines, as compared with the traditional palpation technique based on anatomical landmarks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00996905.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations63
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207