Efficacy of Pethidine and Tramadol in the Suppression of Postoperative Shivering: A Comparative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postoperative shivering is a common complication that can affect patient comfort and stability. Pethidine and tramadol are widely used to relieve this symptom, but their relative effectiveness and safety remain under investigation. In this randomized trial, 50 patients (aged 25–35 years) with postoperative shivering were divided into two groups: one group receiving intravenous tramadol (n = 25 patients) and one group receiving pethidine (n = 25 patients). Onset of drug action, vital signs, and side effects were systematically assessed. Pethidine had a significantly faster onset of action than tramadol (12.20 ± 0.35 min vs 7.16 ± 0.28 min, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding body temperature, heart rate, oxygen saturation, or blood pressure (P < 0.05). Side effects, such as dizziness (16% vs. 8%), nausea and vomiting (20% vs. 8%), and nausea alone (48% vs. 20%), were more common and showed a statistically significant increase in the tramadol group. Both drugs were effective in suppressing postoperative tremor, but pethidine demonstrated superior efficacy, a faster onset of action, and a better safety profile. These results confirm pethidine as the recommended choice at an intravenous dose of 0.5 mg/kg.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".