MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306167951 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.oa.22.00074

Comparison of the Effect of Intra-Articular, Periarticular, and Combined Injection of Analgesic on Pain Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

2022· article· en· W4306167951 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJBJS Open Access · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeWOMACOsteoarthritisVisual analogue scaleAnalgesicMorphineTotal knee arthroplastyConfidence intervalRandomizationRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaArthroplastyMinimal clinically important differenceProspective cohort studySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of 3 methods of intraoperative analgesic cocktail injection during total knee arthroplasty (TKA)-intra-articular (IA), periarticular (PA), and combined intra-articular and periarticular (IA+PA)-on controlling early postoperative pain. Methods: This was a prospective double-blinded parallel randomized clinical trial. A total of 153 patients scheduled for TKA were allocated to IA, PA, or IA+PA (51 patients each) by block randomization. The primary outcome was morphine consumption. Secondary outcomes were visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, knee flexion, straight leg raising, Knee Society Score (KSS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Results: The morphine consumption was lowest in the PA group (median = 0, interquartile range [IQR] = 5) and highest in the IA group (median = 10, IQR = 5). The PA group had significantly lower VAS pain at rest than either IA (mean difference = -0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.93 to -0.46; p < 0.001) or PA+IA (mean difference = -0.41; 95% CI = -0.65 to -0.18; p < 0.001). The PA group had also lower VAS pain during activity compared with IA (mean difference = -0.63; 95% CI = -0.85 to -0.40; p < 0.001) and IA+PA (mean difference = -0.38; 95% CI = -0.61 to -0.16; p < 0.001). The PA group had significantly greater active knee flexion compared with IA (mean difference = 9.68°; 95% CI = 5.50° to 13.86°; p < 0.001) and IA+PA (mean difference = 5.13°; 95% CI = 0.95° to 9.31°; p = 0.010). Passive knee flexion was greater for PA than IA (mean difference = 7.85°; 95% CI = 4.25° to 11.44°; p < 0.001). Other outcome variables were not significantly different among the 3 groups. The only complications were wound drainage (1 each in the IA and IA+PA groups) and deep venous thrombosis (1 in the IA group). Conclusions: PA was associated with less early postoperative pain and greater active knee flexion compared with the other 2 analgesic methods. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.323 · 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