MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415414421 · doi:10.14740/ijcp1024

Preliminary Experience With a Lidocaine Infusion as an Adjunct During Acute Pain Management Related to Medical Illnesses in Pediatric Patients

2025· article· en· W4415414421 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elisa Villalobos, Sibelle Aurelie Yemele Kitio, Catherine Roth, Ambrish B. Patel, Joseph D. Tobias

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Clinical Pediatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidocaineAdverse effectInterquartile rangeAcute painAnalgesicIntensive care unitIntensive carePain management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The potential analgesic effects of lidocaine have been reported in anecdotal reports and larger clinical trials in adults. However, there remains limited information regarding its use in pediatric-aged patients. In many institutions, continuous lidocaine infusions may be restricted to the pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) setting. This study assessed the safety and feasibility of the use of lidocaine outside the ICU setting as an adjunct for acute pain management related to medical conditions in pediatric patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of patients ≤ 21 years of age with acute medical illnesses, who received a continuous lidocaine infusion on the inpatient ward for the management of acute pain related to medical illnesses. Results: The study cohort included 15 patients who received a total of 46 lidocaine infusions during the study period. Patient ages ranged from 10 to 21 years (median age: 14 years, interquartile range (IQR): 13 - 20 years) with a median weight of 57.9 kg (IQR: 54 - 74 kg). The majority of encounters (n = 43, 94%) were for pain related to sickle cell disease. Most encounters (n = 31; 67%) received continuous lidocaine infusions for 1 - 7 days at a median dose of 1 mg/kg/h. Adverse events were noted on 11 of the 310 infusion days (4%), and at least one adverse event was reported in nine of the 46 encounters (20%). Infusion rate adjustments were made in six encounters (13%) due to adverse events. No adverse effects required escalation of the level of care. Conclusions: This study, which outlines our use of lidocaine as an adjunct to pain management for acute pain related to acute medical illnesses, expands on our previous work which described lidocaine for surgical pain. The study provides evidence toward the safety of pre-developed pathways and protocols for continuous lidocaine infusions outside the ICU setting, making lidocaine a feasible, non-opioid adjunct for the treatment of acute pain related to medical illnesses.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Clinical PediatricsSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207