MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375951797 · doi:10.9734/jammr/2023/v35i135045

Oral Morphine versus Rectal Ketamine in Pain Management during Burn Wound Dressing: An Open Label Randomized Clinical Trial

2023· article· en· W4375951797 on OpenAlexaff
Alice Gertrude Atai, Kwikiriza Andrew, Okelue E Okobi, Queen L Ekpa, Oghenekevwe Ekrebe, Mercy Oyeinbrakemi Koroyin, Anthony I. Dick, Kafayat Oluwatoyin Bolaji, Enoobong Aderonke Adedoye, Aisha M. T. Abubakar, Emeka Okobi, Endurance O Evbayekha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsConestoga College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKetamineAnesthesiaFLACC scaleSedationAdverse effectMorphineRandomized controlled trialPain scalePopulationAnalgesicSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Oral morphine has been widely used to manage children’s pain during burn wound dressing. Rectal ketamine may also be safely administered to children.
 Objective: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of oral morphine vs. rectal racemic ketamine in management of pain during burn wound dressing in a pediatric population in a rural study population.
 Methods: This was a randomized open-label clinical trial done in a rural hospital in Uganda. Study participants were randomly assigned to one of the treatment groups, either oral morphine or rectal ketamine, with a ratio of 1:1. Overall, we enrolled 44 participants, with 22 in each treatment arm.
 Assessment of baseline vital signs, including pulse rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, temperature, oxygen saturation (SPO2), pain assessment (using Face Legs Activity Cry Consolability [FLACC]), and sedation scores (using Richmond’s agitation and sedation scale [RASS]) among others was done. Study participants were followed up hourly for 8 hours for outcomes of interest: adequate pain management/adverse events.
 Results: The mean age of the study participants was 2.56 (±1.59) years. The overall mean intra-procedural pain difference score for children who received oral morphine was 2.7 (SD±2.2) compared to 0 (SD±0) among those who received rectal ketamine, and the mean difference of 2.7 was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Sialorrhea (hyper-salivation) was the only significant adverse event, with more occurrence in the rectal Ketamine treatment arm (n= 8, 36.3%) compared to 1 (5%) in the oral Morphine treatment arm, p = 0.009. There were no significant adverse effects noted in either treatment arm.
 Conclusion: The study showed the non-inferiority of rectal ketamine over oral morphine and concluded that administration of rectal ketamine was better at pain management and safety compared to oral morphine. Rectal ketamine is associated with an increased incidence of sialorrhea compared to oral morphine.

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)0.125
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1250.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.279
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Medicine and Medical ResearchSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207