Ultrasound-guided adductor canal block versus combined adductor canal and infiltration between the popliteal artery and the posterior capsule of the knee block for osteoarthritis knee pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Minimally invasive therapeutic modalities have been used to relieve refractory pain of knee osteoarthritis (OA). OBJECTIVE: The main objective of the study was to compare the adductor canal block (ACB) with combined ACB and infiltration between the popliteal artery and the posterior capsule of the knee (I-PACK) in patients suffering knee OA pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-six patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups: Group I received ultrasound-guided ACB with 10 mL of 0.125 bupivacaine plus 40 mg methylprednisolone And Group II received ultrasound-guided ACB with 10 mL of 0.125 bupivacaine plus 40 mg methylprednisolone and I-PACK block using same volume and concentration as ACB. RESULTS: Group II showed a statistically significant lower value of visual analog and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities scores at all follow-up intervals compared to Group I. CONCLUSION: Combined ACB and I-PACK block provide more effective analgesia and better functional outcome compared to the ACB alone.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".