Reduced Length of Stay and Adverse Events Using Bier Block for Forearm Fracture Reduction in the Pediatric Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Forearm fractures are among the most common pediatric injuries. Procedural sedation is frequently used for analgesia during fracture reduction but requires a prolonged recovery period and can be associated with adverse events. Bier block is a safe alternative for fracture reduction analgesia. This study sought to compare Bier block and procedural sedation for forearm fracture reduction. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients aged 6 to 18 years, presenting with forearm fractures requiring closed reduction from June 2012 to March 2014. Outcomes assessed were emergency department length of stay, reduction success rates, adverse events, and unscheduled return visits. RESULTS: Overall, 274 patients were included (Bier block, n = 109; procedural sedation, n = 165). Mean length of stay was 82 minutes shorter for Bier block patients (279 vs 361 minutes, P < 0.001). Subanalysis revealed a reduced length of stay among Bier block patients with forearm fractures involving a single bone (286 vs 388 minutes, P < 0.001) and both bones (259 vs 321 minutes, P < 0.05). Reduction success did not differ between Bier block and procedural sedation (98.2% vs 97.6%, P = 0.74). There were no major adverse events in either group, but Bier block patients experienced fewer minor adverse events (2.7% vs 14.5%, P < 0.001). Return visit rates were similar between Bier block and procedural sedation (17.6% vs 16.9%, P = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with procedural sedation, forearm fracture reduction performed with Bier block was associated with a reduced emergency department length of stay and fewer adverse events, with no differences in reduction success or return visits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".