MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192069926 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-41224/v1

Improving surgical patient’s knowledge about safe use of opioids: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020· preprint· en· W3192069926 on OpenAlexafffund
Helen R. Doherty, Enoch Lam, Maria Garstka, Junior Chuang, David T. Wong, David R. Urbach, Tania DiRenna, Frances Chung, Jean Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square (Research Square) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoToronto Western Hospital
FundersWomen's College HospitalOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Informed consentPatient educationOpioidPhysical therapySurgeryFamily medicineInternal medicineAlternative medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Currently, it is not routine practice to provide standardized patient education for safe postoperative opioid use. The objective of our study was to evaluate the impact of an educational pamphlet for surgical patients on knowledge about safe use, proper storage, and disposal of opioids. Methods This multi-center randomized controlled study recruited 100 patients in the pre-operative clinic. Inclusion criteria were English-speaking, ≥ 18 years, able to give informed consent, and not on opioids for chronic pain or within the past 30 days. All patients completed a baseline knowledge questionnaire (maximum score 38) on opioid safety. Patients were randomized to intervention: educational pamphlet, or control: standard care (no pamphlet) group. Questionnaires were repeated immediately post-education in the intervention group, and at 15, and 30 days after surgery in both groups. The primary outcome was change in knowledge score post-education in the intervention compared to control group. Secondary outcomes were immediate post-education, 15, and 30-day score, and answering safe storage, and disposal questions correctly. Results Between groups, the post-education score immediately after the intervention was higher in the intervention vs. control group baseline 34.2 [95% CI 33.1–35.3] vs 28.3 [95% CI 26.6–29.9]; P < 0.0001). In the intervention vs control group, mean scores were higher 31.6 (95% CI 30.5–32.7) vs 29.1 (95% CI 27.9–30.2; P = .002) at 15 days, and 32.4 (95%CI 31.4–33.5) vs 30.5 (95% CI 29.2–31.7; P = .017) at 30 days. Within the intervention group, the mean score immediately post-education (34.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 33.1–35.3]) was higher than baseline (27.8 [95% CI 26.3–29.3]); P < 0.0001. Within the intervention group, the difference in mean score versus baseline was 3.8 (95% CI 2.1–5.5) at 15 days, and 4.6 (95% CI 2.9–6.3) at 30 days, (P < 0.05 for all timepoints). For safe disposal, a correct answer was given (intervention vs control group) by 100% vs 89.7% at 30 days (P = 0.04). Conclusions Within the intervention group, there was a significant improvement in knowledge on safe opioid use immediately post-education, and retention of knowledge at 15 and 30 days postoperatively. The intervention group had better knowledge scores compared to the baseline control group, and 15 and 30 days after surgery. Trial Registration: This study was registered in clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03959787 on May 22, 2019.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.316 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square (Research Square)Same topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207