Safety and efficacy of routine postoperative ibuprofen for pain and disability related to ectopic bone formation after hip replacement surgery (HIPAID): a randomised control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
\n\t\t\t\t\t<b>Objectives </b>To determine the benefits and risks of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) as prophylaxis for ectopic bone formation in patients undergoing total hip replacement (or revision) surgery.<br /><b>Design </b>Double blind randomised placebo controlled clinical trial, stratified by treatment site and surgery (primary or revision).<br /><b>Setting </b>20 orthopaedic surgery centres in Australia and New Zealand.<br /><b>Participants </b>902 patients undergoing elective primary or revision total hip replacement surgery.<br /><b>Intervention</b> 14 days' treatment with ibuprofen (1200 mg daily) or matching placebo started within 24 hours of surgery.<br /><b>Main outcome measures</b> Changes in self reported hip pain and physical function 6 to 12 months after surgery (Western Ontario and McMaster University Arthritis index).<br /><b>Results </b>There were no significant differences between the groups for improvements in hip pain (mean difference -0.1, 95% confidence interval -0.4 to 0.2, P = 0.6) or physical function (-0.1, -0.4 to 0.2, P = 0.5), despite a decreased risk of ectopic bone formation (relative risk 0.69, 0.56 to 0.83) associated with ibuprofen. There was a significantly increased risk of major bleeding complications in the ibuprofen group during the admission period (2.09, 1.00 to 4.39).<b><br />Conclusions </b>These data do not support the use of routine prophylaxis with NSAIDs in patients undergoing total hip replacement surgery.<br /><b>Trial registration </b>NCT00145730.<br />\n\t\t\t\t
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".