MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224436115 · doi:10.1186/s13063-022-06273-1

Effect of GOAL-Directed ANalgesia using ANI (Analgesia/Nociception Index) during general anesthesia on immediate postoperative pain and intraoperative hemodynamics in adult patients (GOALDAN study): a study protocol for randomized, controlled, multicenter trial

2022· article· en· W4224436115 on OpenAlexaff
Adrien Michalot, Jean-Étienne Bazin, Philippe Richebé, Bernard Allaouchiche, Emmanuel Boselli

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaRemifentanilRandomized controlled trialClinical trialMorphineNociceptionSurgeryPropofol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Severe postoperative pain remains a major problem that is seen in 20 to 40% of patients. The Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI) is a 0-100 index reflecting the relative parasympathetic activity allowing for intraoperative analgesia monitoring. We have previously shown that an ANI value < 50 immediately before extubation may predict the occurrence of immediate postoperative pain with good performance. We hypothesized that GOAL-Directed ANalgesia may provide reduced immediate postoperative pain and optimized intraoperative remifentanil administration (GOLDAN study). METHODS: The GOALDAN study is an international, multicenter, simple-blind, parallel, prospective, randomized, controlled, two-armed trial. Patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio in the control group or in the experimental group. Patients will be randomly allocated to either the intervention group (ANI) or the control group (standard care only). In the ANI group, the administration of remifentanil will be goal-directed targeting a 50-80 ANI range, with a prophylactic injection of morphine immediately after extubation if the case of ANI < 50. Our primary objective was to determine whether the prophylactic administration of morphine at the end of the procedure in patients at risk of immediate postoperative pain (ANI < 50 immediately before extubation) could reduce the incidence of the latter by 50% in the post-anesthetic care unit. Our secondary objective was to determine whether the intraoperative use of goal-directed analgesia with an ANI target of 50 to 80 could improve intraoperative hemodynamics and postoperative outcome. DISCUSSION: Because of the paucity of well-conducted trials, the authors believe that a randomized-controlled trial will improve the evidence for using analgesia monitoring during general anesthesia and strengthen current recommendations for intraoperative analgesia management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03618082. Registered on 7 August 2018.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207