The Efficacy of Carbon Dioxide Paste in Alleviating Pain in Patients After Neck Dissection: Protocol for a Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Head and neck cancers that cause severe aesthetic and functional disorders normally metastasize to the cervical lymph nodes. Patients with cervical lymph node metastasis are undergoing neck dissection. Shoulder complaints are common after neck dissection, with patients reporting symptoms such as pain, weakness, shoulder droop, and disability. However, no safe and effective treatment is available for this condition at present. We will conduct a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of carbon dioxide (CO2) paste in relieving pain in patients after neck dissection. Objective This will be the first clinical study to compare the efficacy of CO2 paste with placebo in relieving postoperative pain in patients who underwent neck dissection. Methods We will perform this trial at the Kobe University Hospital in Japan. Patients will be randomized 1:1 into the CO2 paste and control groups. Patients in the CO2 paste group will have the CO2 paste applied to the cervical surface skin for 10 minutes once per day for 14 consecutive days. The primary end point of the study is a change in the visual analog scale (VAS) scores of neck pain from baseline on day 1 (preapplication) to the end of drug application (day 15). Secondary end points include changes in the following parameters from baseline on day 1 to the end of drug application (day 15) or the study (day 29): neck pain VAS score (days 1-29), grip strength (days 1-15 and 1-29), VAS scores for subjective symptoms (the feeling of strangulation, numbness, swelling, and warmth in the neck and shoulder region) for days 1-15 and 1-29, whether the VAS score improved more than 30% (days 1-15), the arm abduction test (days 1-15 and 1-29), shoulder range of motion (abduction and flexion) for days 1-15 and 1-29, occurrence of skin disorders, and occurrence of serious side effects. Periodic monitoring will be conducted for participants during the trial. This study was approved by the certified review board of Kobe University. Results The intervention commenced in May 2021 and will continue until March 2024. The collected data will provide information on the efficacy of the CO2 paste treatment. The primary end point will be compared using the Wilcoxon test, with the 1-sided significance level set at 5%. Each evaluation item will be summarized. Secondary efficacy end points will be analyzed to provide additional insights into the primary analysis. Findings based on the treatment effects are expected to be submitted for publication in 2025. Conclusions This trial will provide exploratory evidence of the efficacy and safety of CO2 paste in relieving pain in patients after neck dissection. Trial Registration Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT) identifier: jRCTs051210028; https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCTs051210028 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/50500
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 | 0.024 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.005 |
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".