MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Oral ketamine for acute postoperative analgesia (OKAPA) trial: A randomized controlled, single center pilot study

2024· article· en· W4404579961 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Dinsmore, Kristof Nijs, Eric Plitman, Emad Al Azazi, Lashmi Venkatraghavan, Karim S. Ladha, Hance Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Anesthesia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialKetamineAnesthesiaSingle CenterAcute painPilot trialSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Although opioids represent the mainstay of treating surgical pain, their use is associated with significant side effects. There is an urgent need to find new pain relievers with safer side effect profiles. One drug that has been receiving increasing attention is ketamine. By using the oral route of administration, ketamine could potentially be used by patients in a less resource-intensive manner with similar efficacy. This study aims to examine the role of oral ketamine in improving recovery after major spine surgery. DESIGN: A prospective, single-center, double blinded parallel arm, placebo controlled randomized feasibility trial. SETTING: Toronto Western Hospital (TWH), UHN, Toronto, Canada. PATIENTS: Adult patients (aged 18-75) undergoing multi-level lumbar spine decompression and fusion with planned overnight admission in hospital. INTERVENTIONS: Study treatment (oral ketamine 30 mg) or matching placebo for three days (nine doses total) or until hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the patient-reported Quality of Recovery-15 score (QoR-15). Secondary outcomes were opioid use, pain intensity, pain interference (PROMIS-pain interference questionnaire), mood (PHQ-9) and, side-effects (Generic Assessment of Side Effects Scale). MAIN RESULTS: Data from 35 patients were analyzed, of which 18 patients in the ketamine group and 17 patients in the placebo group. There were no significant differences identified in QoR-15 scores at postoperative days 1,3,7, and 30. There were also no significant differences found in pain intensity scale scores at postoperative days 1, 3, 7, and 30, and PROMIS and PHQ-9 scores at postoperative days 7 and 30. Significantly less oral opioids were used in the ketamine group compared to the placebo group on postoperative day 3 and by postoperative day 7. In addition, patients in the ketamine group spent significantly less days on oral opioids and trended to be discharged from hospital earlier. CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrated that low dose oral ketamine can be safely used as an adjunct in postoperative pain treatment to help reduce opioid consumption after major spine surgery.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical AnesthesiaSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207