MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990866468 · doi:10.1038/s41393-019-0381-2

Clinical recommendations for use of lidocaine lubricant during bowel care after spinal cord injury prolong care routines and worsen autonomic dysreflexia: results from a randomised clinical trial

2019· article· en· W2990866468 on OpenAlexafffund
Vera-Ellen M. Lucci, Maureen S. McGrath, Jessica A. Inskip, Shirromi Sarveswaran, Rhonda Willms, Victoria E. Claydon

Bibliographic record

VenueSpinal Cord · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesSimon Fraser UniversityKelowna General Hospital
FundersInternational Collaboration on Repair DiscoveriesCraig H. Neilsen Foundation
KeywordsAutonomic dysreflexiaMedicineSpinal cord injuryAnesthesiaPlaceboLidocaineDefecationHeart rateBlood pressureSpinal cordInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical trial. Spinal cord injury (SCI) impacts autonomic function and bowel management. Bowel care is a potential trigger for autonomic dysreflexia (AD; paroxysmal hypertension elicited by sensory stimuli below the level of lesion). AD can be life threatening so strategies to minimise AD are prioritised after SCI. Lidocaine lubricant is recommended during bowel care with the rationale to minimise the sensory stimulus, reducing AD. The objective of this study was to assess whether lidocaine lubricant (Xylocaine 2%) ameliorates AD during at-home bowel care compared with standard lubricant (placebo). Community. Participants ( n = 13; age 44.0 ± 3.3 years) with high-level SCI (C3-T4) performed their normal at-home bowel care on two days, each time using a different lubricant, with continuous non-invasive cardiovascular monitoring. Injury to spinal autonomic (sympathetic) nerves was determined from low-frequency systolic arterial pressure (LF SAP) variability. Participants displayed reduced autonomic function (LF SAP 3.02 ± 0.84 mmHg 2 ), suggesting impaired autonomic control. Bowel care duration was increased with lidocaine (79.1 ± 10.0 min) compared to placebo (57.7 ± 6.3 min; p = 0.018). All participants experienced AD on both days, but maximum SAP was higher with lidocaine (214.3 ± 10.5 mmHg) than placebo (196.7 ± 10.0 mmHg; p = 0.046). Overall, SAP was higher for longer with lidocaine (6.5 × 10 5 ± 0.9 × 10 5 mmHg • beat) than placebo (4.4 × 10 5 ± 0.6 × 10 5 mmHg • beat; p = 0.018) indicating a higher burden of AD. Heart rate and rhythm disturbances were increased during AD, particularly with lidocaine use. At-home bowel care was a potent trigger for AD. Our findings contradict recommendations for lidocaine use during bowel care, suggesting that anaesthetic lubricants impair reflex bowel emptying, resulting in longer care routines with an increased burden of AD.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSpinal CordSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207