MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388108046 · doi:10.18502/aacc.v9i5.13956

A Comparison of Laryngospasm in "No Touch" and "Head Down Deep Extubation": A Randomized Clinical Trials

2023· article· en· W4388108046 on OpenAlexaff
Niyoosha Yoosefi, Fatemeh Hajimohammadi, Arash Jafarieh, Hamed Abdollahi, Afshar Etemadi Ale Agha, Mehrdad Behzadi, Nader Ali Nazemian, Mina Abdolahi, Mohammad Gholizadeh, Abolghasem Yousefi

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Anesthesia and Critical Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersTehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services
KeywordsLaryngospasmMedicineAnesthesiaTonsillectomyRandomized controlled trialIncidence (geometry)RandomizationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Tonsillectomy and adenotonsillectomy are simple surgical procedures that can cause laryngospasm as complications which blocks airflow causing serious issues. The laryngospasm incidence decreases in patients undergoing deep extubation. Present study aimed to compare laryngospasm in innovative method of head down deep extubation with No Touch method. Methods: Forty-two patients were enrolled in the study in (23 females and 19 males) between the ages of 5 up to 15 who were referred for tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy. The patients were divided into two randomized No Touch (n=21) and head down deep extubation (n=21) intervention groups according to permuted block randomization. All patients received standard general anesthesia. The first group received the no-touch extubation and the second group received head down deep extubation method. The duration of surgery, Time interval between the injection of reverse drugs and the return of spontaneous breathing (TRDRSB), time interval between anesthesia drug withdrawal and extubation (TIDWE), SPO2, incidence of laryngospasm, and cough were recorded and graded according to their severity at 0, 5, 10, 15 minutes and 2 hours after extubation, respectfully. Results: The age, weight, gender and duration of surgery, TRDRSB was not statistically different between the two groups but TIDWE showed a significant difference between groups (P<0.001). The SPO2 levels in 0, 5, 10, 15 minutes, and 2 hours after surgery were not significantly different between the “no touch” and “head down deep extubation” groups as well as the severity of coughing and laryngospasm. However, the rate of laryngospasm and cough in "No touch" group was higher than " head down deep extubation " group. Conclusion: HDDE is an innovative technique that it seems in comparison to No Touch method can reduce the incidence of laryngospasm. However, further comprehensive trials are needed to confirm these findings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 venueArchives of Anesthesia and Critical Care→Same topicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques→French-language works237,207→