MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936694326 · doi:10.1177/1558944719843635

Upper-Extremity Nerve Decompression Under Local Anesthesia: A Systematic Review of Methods for Reduction of Postoperative Pain and Opioid Consumption

2019· review· en· W2936694326 on OpenAlexaff
Yehuda Chocron, Albaraa Aljerian, Stéphanie Thibaudeau

Bibliographic record

VenueHand · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineModalitiesAnesthesiaPerioperativeOpioidDecompressionOxycodoneSedationNerve blockSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Opioid abuse is a major health concern in North America. Data have shown an alarming increase in opioid-related deaths and complications, which has shed light on current prescription practices across many specialties, including hand surgery. To that end, we sought to conduct a focused literature review to determine the available modalities to decrease postoperative pain and opioid consumption following upper-extremity nerve decompression procedures, taking advantage of the homogeneity and inherent pain pathways of this specific patient cohort. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted. Primary studies evaluating perioperative and intraoperative modalities for postoperative pain reduction and analgesic consumption following upper-extremity nerve decompression procedures under local anesthesia were included. Studies implementing modalities requiring non–hand surgeon expertise (ie, intravenous sedation), as well as studies that include non–nerve decompression procedures, were excluded. Results: A total of 1478 studies were identified, and 9 studies were included after full-text review. Six studies evaluated intraoperative and 3 studies evaluated preoperative and postoperative modalities. Successful interventions included buffered anesthetic, the use of hyaluronidase, and varying techniques and mixtures for anesthetic administration. No successful preoperative or postoperative modalities were identified. Conclusion: Despite data reporting on the dangers associated with current opioid prescription practices, evidence-based modalities to decrease postoperative pain and opioid consumption are limited in general. Several intraoperative modalities do exist, and nonopioid oral analgesics, standardized opioid protocols, and reduced postoperative prescriptions can be used. Large randomized controlled trials evaluating perioperative modalities for pain reduction are needed to further address this issue.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.008
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHandSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207