Short- and long-term results of an inpatient programme to manage Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this retrospective study was to determine whether an inpatient approach and the use of regional anaesthesia techniques can accelerate the recovery to normal functions in children with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS). This study looked at the data of patients admitted to the rehabilitation unit with a diagnosis of CRPS from January 2010 to April 2015. Variables such as hospital stay, medications administered, regional anaesthesia procedures, changes in functional status prior to treatment and at the time of discharge, psychological evaluation and diagnosis were evaluated. A total of 31 patients (21 females and 10 males) were admitted with a diagnosis of CRPS 1 and 2. In all, 97% of the patients received a peripheral or central nerve catheter for an average of 4 days with pain scores of Verbal Numeric Scale (VNS) score = 1.0 ± 0.7 and an average length of hospital stay of 8.2 ± 2.6 days. The modified Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM) scores and Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists tests significantly improved at the time of hospital discharge, as well as their pain scores, which decreased from 8.2 ± 2 to 1.6 ± 3. In conclusion, these data suggest that the use of regional anaesthesia techniques and an intensive inpatient rehabilitation programme could accelerate the recovery of children with CRPS.
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 | 0.003 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".