Depressed patients feel more pain in the short term after total knee arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The hypothesis of this study was that depressive patients feel more pain in the immediate TKA postoperative period in comparison with non-depressed patients. METHODS: The diagnosis of depression was made with the Geriatric Depression Scale Short Form. The Visual Analogic Score (VAS) was registered each 8 h during the first 3 days. The mean and maximum VAS and the number of analgesic rescues required in this period were calculated in 803 consecutive TKAs. The Knee Society Score (KSS), the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) scores were obtained preoperatively and at the 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Forty-eight (6%) of these patients were considered depressed. The results obtained in the depressed patients and non-depressed were, respectively, mean VAS (2.0 vs 1.0, p = 0.00), maximum VAS (5.3 vs 1.6, p = 0.00), and number of rescues needed (4.4 vs 1.8, p = 0.00). Although depressed patients scored worse in the functional and quality of life scores in the preoperative period, the improvement obtained (1-year outcomes minus preoperative outcomes) in the different scores was similar in both groups with the exception of the mental domain of the SF-36, which improved further in depressed patients (p = 0.00). CONCLUSION: Depressed patients feel more pain in the immediate postoperative period. However, the improvement obtained in functional and referred quality of life scores is similar to non-depressed patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".