[Anesthetic effect of preemptive analgesia of frequency acupoint electrical stimulation on painless-induced abortion].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the anesthetic effect of preemptive analgesia of frequency acupoint electrical stimulation on painless-induced abortion as well as its effect on anesthetics dosage. METHODS: Ninety cases of early pregnancy who selected painless-induced abortion were randomly divided into two groups, 45 cases in each group. Frequency acupoint electrical stimulation at Ciliao (BL 32) and Shenshu (BL 23), disperse-densewave, 2 Hz/100 Hz in frequency for 15 to 20 min, was applied in the group A, which was followed by intravenous anesthesia of propofol. The intravenous anesthesia of propofol was applied in the group B. The blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR) and SpO2 before, during and after surgery, anesthetic effect and dosage, waking time and adverse events were observed in the two groups. RESULTS: The BP and HR during and after the surgery in the group A were not statistically different from those before the surgery (all P > 0.05). The BP was reduced and HR was slowed down during the surgery in the group B, which was significantly different from those before the surgery as well as those in the group A (all P < 0.05). The dosage of propofol was (114. 3-+6. 1) mg in the group A. obviously less than (193.2 +/- 8.9) mg in the group B (P < 0.05). The waking time was (5.6 +/- 1.2) min in the group A, obviously less than (10.1 +/- 3.9) min in the group B (P < 0.05). As for anesthetic effect, the incidence of Grade I in the group A was more than the group B (P < 0.05). The adverse events, including nausea, vomiting and contractions pain in the group A were evidently less than those in the group B (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The preemptive analgesia of frequency acupoint electrical stimulation could significantly improve anesthetic effect of painless-induced abortion, reduce dosage of anesthetics, shorten waking time of surgery and guarantee the safety of surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".