The what, why and when of wide awake local anaesthesia no tourniquet surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wide awake local anaesthesia no tourniquet, also known as WALANT, is the practice of performing surgery under local anaesthetic in the absence of a tourniquet. This technique uses the vasoconstrictive effects of adrenaline and the local anaesthetic effects of lignocaine to establish a Bier block with haemostatic control. Permitting active patient participation intraoperatively, wide awake local anaesthesia no tourniquet surgery improves patient compliance with rehabilitation and yields higher patient satisfaction. With reduced cost and equipment requirements, this method improves accessibility for patients and productivity for healthcare institutions. This is of particular benefit within the current COVID-19 climate, as wide awake local anaesthesia no tourniquet technique provides a means of overcoming restrictions to theatre access and anaesthetic support. This review delves into the current uses of wide awake local anaesthesia no tourniquet surgery, outlining the initial conception of the practice by Canadian surgeons. The advantages and disadvantages are considered, and potential future applications of this technique are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".