Live and Recorded Music Interventions to Reduce Postoperative Pain: Protocol for a Nonrandomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postoperative patients who were previously engaged in the live musical intervention Meaningful Music in Healthcare reported significantly reduced perception of pain than patients without the intervention. This encouraging finding indicates a potential for postsurgical musical interventions to have a place in standard care as therapeutic pain relief. However, live music is logistically complex in hospital settings, and previous studies have reported the more cost-effective recorded music to serve as a similar pain-reducing function in postsurgical patients. Moreover, little is known about the potential underlying physiological mechanisms that may be responsible for the reduced pain perceived by patients after the live music intervention. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to see whether a live music intervention can significantly lower perceived postoperative pain compared to a recorded music intervention and do-nothing control. The secondary objective is to explore the neuroinflammatory underpinnings of postoperative pain and the potential role of a music intervention in mitigating neuroinflammation. METHODS: This intervention study will compare subjective postsurgical pain ratings among 3 groups: live music intervention, recorded music intervention, and standard care control. The design will take the form of an on-off nonrandomized controlled trial. Adult patients undergoing elective surgery will be invited to participate. The intervention is a daily music session of up to 30 minutes for a maximum of 5 days. The live music intervention group is visited by professional musicians once a day for 15 minutes and will be asked to interact. The recorded music active control intervention group receives 15 minutes of preselected music over headphones. The do-nothing group receives typical postsurgical care that does not include music. RESULTS: At study completion, we will have an empirical indication of whether live music or recorded music has a significant impact on postoperative perceived pain. We hypothesize that the live music intervention will have more impact than recorded music but that both will reduce the perceived pain more than care-as-usual. We will moreover have the preliminary evidence of the physiological underpinnings responsible for reducing the perceived pain during a music intervention, from which hypotheses for future research may be derived. CONCLUSIONS: Live music can provide relief from pain experienced by patients recovering from surgery; however, it is not known to what degree live music improves the patients' pain experience than the logistically simpler alternative of recorded music. Upon completion, this study will be able to statistically compare live versus recorded music. This study will moreover be able to provide insight into the neurophysiological mechanisms involved in reduced pain perception as a result of postoperative music listening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands Central Commission on Human Research NL76900.042.21; https://www.toetsingonline.nl/to/ccmo_search.nsf/fABRpop?readform&unids=F2CA4A88E6040A45C1258791001AEA44. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/40034.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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 teacher head, 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".