Analgesic Effect – Comparison of Paracetamol Administered Intermittently and Through Patient-Controlled Analgesia Pump after Lumbar Discectomy: a Prospective Clinical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lumbar discectomy is the most common surgical treatment for intervertebral disc extrusion. Postoperative pain is a common clinical problem that greatly affects the length of hospitalization, functional status and patient quality of life. Th e aim of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic effi cacy of paracetamol administered intermittently and through patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump following single level lumbar discectomy. Patients who underwent elective lumbar discectomy of intervertebral disc extrusion at the L4-L5 level diagnosed by magnetic resonance of the lumbosacral spine were included in the study. Pain was assessed at regular intervals for 48 hours through a shortened version of McGill pain questionnaire translated in the Croatian language. When pain was monitored as a summarized variable for each measurement, PCA group significantly stood up after 24 hours with better perception of pain compared to the intermittent group (c2-test, p<0.05). Adequate pain relief is an important aspect of postoperative care in spinal surgery patients. Postoperative use of paracetamol through PCA pump achieved better pain control and pain management versuspostoperative use of intermittent paracetamol analgesia after lumbar discectomy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".