MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011343201 · doi:10.2196/16415

Effectiveness of a Mobile eHealth App in Guiding Patients in Pain Control and Opiate Use After Total Knee Replacement: Randomized Controlled Trial

2020· article· en· W3011343201 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yvette Pronk, Maud Cornelia Wilhelmina Maria Peters, A. Sheombar, Justus‐Martijn Brinkman

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialOpiateVisual analogue scalePhysical therapyAcetaminophenAnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Little is known about pain and opiate use at home directly after total knee replacement (TKR). Due to adverse effects, low opiate use is desired. An electronic health app (PainCoach) was developed to guide patients in pain control and opiate use. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to investigate the effects of the PainCoach app on pain control and opiate use in patients who underwent TKR during the first 2 weeks at home after surgery. METHODS: In an unblinded randomized controlled trial, patients scheduled for TKR were offline recruited and randomized to a PainCoach group or control group. In the PainCoach group, the PainCoach app was downloaded on each patient's smartphone or tablet. In response to the patient's input of the pain experienced, the PainCoach app gave advice on pain medication use, exercises/rest, and when to call the clinic. This advice was the same as that received during usual care. The control group received usual care. The primary outcomes were opiate use and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at rest, during activity, and at night during the first 2 weeks at home after surgery, which were collected daily from day 1 until 14 postoperatively by online questionnaires. The actual amount of app use was recorded, and active use was defined as ≥12 total app uses. RESULTS: The pain scores did not differ between the groups. The PainCoach group (n=38) used 23.2% less opiates (95% CI -38.3 to -4.4; P=.02) and 14.6% more acetaminophen (95% CI 8.2-21.3; P<.001) when compared with the findings in the control group (n=33). The PainCoach app was used 12 (IQR 4.5-22.0) times per patient. In the active PainCoach subgroup (n=19), the following were noted when compared with the findings in the control group: 4.1 times faster reduction of the VAS pain score during activity (95% CI -7.5 to -0.8; P=.02), 6.3 times faster reduction of the VAS pain score at night (95% CI -10.1 to -2.6; P=.001), 44.3% less opiate use (95% CI -59.4 to -23.5; P<.001), 76.3% less gabapentin use (95% CI -86.0 to -59.8; P<.001), and 21.0% more acetaminophen use (95% CI 12.6-30.0; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the PainCoach app contributes to reduced opiate use in the initial period at home after TKR. Active use of this app leads to a further reduction in opiate use and improved pain control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03961152; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03961152.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations71
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207