MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6944974706 · doi:10.22038/ijogi.2023.22961

The efficacy and safety of non-narcotic anesthesia in obstetrics and gynecology surgeries: a systematic review

2023· article· en· W6944974706 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiclofenacFentanylCochrane LibraryPain reliefObservational studyOpioidSystematic reviewMEDLINEMorphineClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Researchers have always been investigating the non-narcotic medications for obstetrics and gynecology surgeries. The present study was performed with aim to investigate the efficacy and safety of using anesthesia without narcotics compared to conventional anesthesia with narcotics in the treatment of pain and complications after surgery.Methods: In this systematic review study, according to the PRISMA statement, electronic databases of ‎PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane library, as well as the Persian databases of SID and Magiran ‎were searched with the help of Google Scholar between 1990 and the end of 2022. The studies which compared anesthesia with narcotic-based and non-narcotic-based drugs in a clinical trial or observational study design were extracted and qualitative evidence was synthesized from the results of the studies.Results: In this systematic review, 11 studies including anesthesia induction drugs, anesthesia maintenance and postoperative pain management were examined. For post-surgical pain management, non-opioid drugs such as ketorolac, paracetamol, paracetamol + ketorolac, tenoxicam and diclofenac were used, and in the case of insufficient pain management, opioid rescue drugs such as tramadol, morphine and fentanyl were also used. In general, non-opioid drugs such as paracetamol and non-steroid anti-inflammatory medications are safer than opioids and, in some cases, can be as effective or more effective in providing pain relief and anesthesia; however this pain relief and anesthesia varies depending on the type of drug. The quality of extracted evidence was low according to the Cochrane and Newcastle-Ottawa risk of bias scale.Conclusion: The use of anesthesia induction and maintenance techniques using non-opioid substances in cesarean and other gynecological surgeries can help to reduce the consumption of opioids and related side effects, such as cardiopulmonary arrest, improve pain control and improve recovery after 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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicAnesthesia and Pain Management→French-language works237,207→