Effects of periarticular injection on analgesic effects and NSAID use in total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study examined periarticular multimodal drug injection and the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for an early analgesic effect after total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty. Patient satisfaction and benefits from the treatment were also assessed. METHODS: A total of 110 patients who were scheduled to undergo total knee arthroplasty and 86 patients who were scheduled to undergo total hip arthroplasty were divided into two groups, the study group and the control group. The study group received a periarticular multimodal drug injection during surgery. The control group received an equal volume of normal saline. All patients received an analgesia pump and a moderate dose of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Resting and motion Numeric Rating Scale scores, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, knee or hip joint range of motion, length of postoperative hospital stay, patient satisfaction, total nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug consumption and side effects were recorded. RESULTS: Both study groups exhibited significant improvement in pain Numeric Rating Scale scores during rest and exercise several days after the surgery. The range of joint motion was greater in the study group, and the length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter than that in the control group. Patients in the study group consumed fewer nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and reported greater satisfaction with surgery. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative periarticular multimodal drug injection significantly relieved pain after surgery and reduced nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug consumption. These patient had a better postoperative experience, including satisfaction and rehabilitation.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".