MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W568306574 · doi:10.1177/1098612x15591590

Effects of ketamine and alfaxalone on application of a feline pain assessment scale

2015· article· en· W568306574 on OpenAlexaff
Mandy Buisman, M Wagner, Michelle M. M. Hasiuk, Melanie Prebble, Laura Frey‐Law, Daniel Pang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Feline Medicine and Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversidade Estadual Paulista
KeywordsKetamineAnesthesiaMedicineSedationHydromorphoneIsofluraneCrossover studyAnalgesicPain scalePlaceboOpioidInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the effects of ketamine and alfaxalone on the application of a validated feline-specific multidimensional composite pain scale (UNESP-Botucatu MCPS). METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, blinded, crossover trial, 11 adult cats (weight 4.4 ± 0.6 kg) were given dexmedetomidine (15 μg/kg) and hydromorphone (0.05 mg/kg) with either alfaxalone (2 mg/kg) or ketamine (5 mg/kg) as a single intramuscular injection for the induction of general anesthesia. After orotracheal intubation, general anesthesia (without surgery) was maintained for 32 mins with isoflurane, followed by atipamezole. The following parameters were recorded at baseline, 1-8 h and 24 h post-extubation: pain (pain expression and psychomotor subscales) and sedation scale scores. Alfaxalone treatment injection sites were examined for inflammation at baseline, postinjection, and 8 h and 24 h post-extubation. RESULTS: Psychomotor scores were higher with ketamine at hours 1 (3.5 [0-5.0], P <0.0001), 2 (2.5 [0-4.0], P <0.0001) and 3 (0.5 [0-4.0], P = 0.009) post-extubation compared with alfaxalone (hour 1, 0 [0-2]; hour 2, 0 [0-0]; hour 3, 0 [0-0]). Six cats in the ketamine group crossed the analgesic intervention threshold. In contrast, pain expression scores did not differ significantly between treatments at any time (P >0.05); one cat from each group crossed the analgesic intervention threshold. Sedation was greater with ketamine (1 [0-3], P = 0.02) than alfaxalone (0 [0-1]) 1 h post-extubation. No cats had visible inflammation at the injection sites at any time. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Ketamine has a confounding effect on the psychomotor subscale of the pain scale studied, which may lead to erroneous administration of rescue analgesia. In contrast, alfaxalone was not associated with significant increases in either pain subscale. These effects of ketamine should be considered when evaluating acute postoperative pain in cats.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations50
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Feline Medicine and SurgerySame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207