MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415430220 · doi:10.1302/1358-992x.2025.10.020

DOES ADDITION OF LONGER-ACTING LOCAL ANAESTHETIC IMPROVE POSTOPERATIVE PAIN AFTER CARPAL TUNNEL RELEASE? A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

2025· article· en· W4415430220 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emily Chan, Leslie M. Sims, Chen Yang, Kristi Billard, Daniel N. Sauder

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual analogue scaleLidocaineRandomized controlled trialBupivacaineCarpal tunnel syndromeCarpal tunnel releaseAmbulatoryAnalgesic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is a simple and effective treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome in patients who have failed conservative management. In Canada, this surgery is often performed in the ambulatory clinic under local anesthesia, with lidocaine (a short-acting agent) as the drug of choice. Post-operative pain is a concern for many patients, and a previous study at our institution found that maximal pain was experienced 8 hours after surgery. Although use of a longer-acting anesthetic, such as bupivacaine, should theoretically prolong the post-operative pain blockade, few studies have investigated its use for CTR. Therefore, the aim of our study was to compare the post-operative pain experience after CTR with the use of either our standard lidocaine solution (L) or a longer-acting mixture consisting of lidocaine and bupivacaine in equal amounts (LB). Patients undergoing CTR were randomized into L or LB groups. Post-operative pain severity was recorded at several timepoints within the first 72 hours, using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The timing and quantity of post-operative analgesic use (Tylenol and/or Advil) were also documented. Both patients and assessor were blinded to allocation. A total of 145 patients were recruited. After exclusions, 139 remained: 67 (48.2%) in the L group and 72 (51.8%) in the LB group. Mean age of patients in the L group (56.9 years) was significantly lower than that of the LB group (63.0 years) (p=0.02). Baseline carpal tunnel severity scores were similar between groups. Compared to the L group, post-operative VAS scores were significantly lower in the LB group at 6 hours (2.3 vs 3.2, p=0.02) and 8 hours (2.9 vs 3.9, p=0.02). Additionally, patients in the LB group reported longer time to first analgesic use than those in the L group (5.2 hours vs. 3.7 hours, p=0.02). Our results suggest that patients anesthetized with a mixture of lidocaine and bupivacaine for CTR experienced less postoperative pain at 6 and 8 hours, compared with those who received lidocaine alone. In our experience, this mixture is a feasible alternative to lidocaine for CTR performed under local anesthesia.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic ProceedingsSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207