Pain Catastrophizing Throughout the Perioperative Period in Adolescents With Idiopathic Scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Pain catastrophizing in children and adolescents has been associated to unfavorable postsurgical outcomes. However, pain catastrophizing is rarely measured throughout the perioperative period. Using a prospective longitudinal approach, the present study aimed to identify how pain catastrophizing changes over the perioperative period in pediatric surgical patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adolescent patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale for Children and additional questionnaires to assess pain intensity, state and trait anxiety, and kinesiophobia before surgery, and 1, 2, 5 days, 6 weeks, and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: Patients who had higher levels of pain catastrophizing before surgery were more likely to be anxious, avoid activity that may cause pain, report higher pain intensity before surgery and anticipate more pain after surgery. Low pain catastrophizers increased into a moderate level of pain catastrophizing before decreasing after discharge from the hospital. Meanwhile, moderate and high pain catastrophizers both decreased into lower and moderate levels of catastrophizing, respectively, after discharge from the hospital. DISCUSSION: These findings demonstrate that pain catastrophizing in adolescents changes over the perioperative period. Observing changes in pain catastrophizing throughout the perioperative period may help in recognizing when patients are most vulnerable during this time. Decreasing pain catastrophizing before surgery or in the acute postoperative period through therapies that target pain catastrophizing may help reduce the patient's likelihood of experiencing unfavorable postoperative outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".