Evaluating Persistent Postoperative Pain in One Tertiary Hospital: Incidence, Quality of Life, Associated Factors, and Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persistent postoperative pain (PPP) is defined as persistent pain after surgery of greater than three months' duration. OBJECTIVES: Identify the incidence of PPP in our hospital and its associated factors; evaluate quality of life (QoL) and treatment of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted an observational prospective study in adults proposed to various types of surgery using the brief pain inventory short form preoperatively (T0), one day after surgery, and three months later (T3). If the patient had pain at T3 and other causes of pain were excluded, they were considered to have PPP, and the McGill Pain Questionnaire Short Form was applied. QoL was measured with the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D). RESULTS: One hundred seventy-five patients completed the study. The incidence of PPP was 28%, and the affected patients presented lower QoL. The majority referred to a moderate to severe level of interference in their general activity. Cholecystectomies were less associated with PPP, and total knee/hip replacements were more associated with it. Preoperative pain, preoperative benzodiazepines or antidepressants, and more severe acute postoperative pain were associated with the development of PPP. Half of the patients with PPP were under treatment, and they refer a mean symptomatic relief of 69%. CONCLUSIONS: This study, apart from attempting to better characterize the problem of PPP, emphasizes the lack of its treatment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".