MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does the speed of sternal retraction during coronary artery bypass graft surgery affect postoperative pain outcomes? A randomized controlled trial protocol

2021· preprint· en· W3146364365 on OpenAlexafffund
Dimitri Petsikas, Craig Stewart, Rachel Phelan, René Allard, Michael Cummings, Deborah DuMerton, Joel L. Parlow, Darrin Payne, Robert Tanzola, Louie Wang, Tarit Saha

Bibliographic record

VenueF1000Research · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSoutheastern Ontario Academic Medical Organization
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialOpen peer reviewAffect (linguistics)AnesthesiologyPostoperative painArteryPlant biologyCardiac surgeryAnesthesiaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Background: </ns3:bold> Chronic pain is a serious health issue impacting both the quality of life and productivity of patients. <ns3:sup/> Chronic post-sternotomy pain (CPSP) is characterized by numbness, severe tenderness on palpation, allodynia, as well as constant pain across the anterior chest wall that can persist for months to years after sternotomy. All patients experience early post-operative pain following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG); unfortunately, approximately 30-40% of CABG patients subsequently develop CPSP. <ns3:sup> </ns3:sup> </ns3:p> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Methods:</ns3:bold> The current study is a prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. A sample size of 316 randomly assigned patients (n=158 per group) will provide an 80% power at a 2-sided α of 0.05 to detect a 40% decrease in CPSP incidence at 6 months. Eligible patients scheduled for elective, primary coronary artery bypass graft surgery will be randomly assigned to the CONTROL group, in which sternal retraction is conducted over 30 seconds (as per standard practice); or the SLOW group, in which sternal retraction is achieved over 15 minutes. Surgical and perioperative anesthesia protocols between the two groups are otherwise the same. Our primary outcome is the incidence of CPSP at 6 months. Secondary outcomes are: CPSP incidence at 3 and 12 months, daily sternal incision pain intensity (numeric rating scale (NRS)) at rest and while coughing, and daily analgesic consumption while in hospital and at 7 days postoperatively; pain quality, quality of life, and pain interference with daily function at 3, 6, and 12 months post-operatively. </ns3:p> <ns3:p/> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Discussion:</ns3:bold> Our randomized controlled trial will determine whether retracting the sternum more slowly for exposure of the heart during CABG surgery will decrease the incidence and/or severity of CPSP. </ns3:p> <ns3:p/> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>ClinicalTrials.gov registration:</ns3:bold> NCT02697812 (03/03/2016 </ns3:p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF1000ResearchSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207