The utility of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block versus intrathecal morphine for postoperative analgesia in anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: a multicentre triple blinded randomised controlled trial protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a novel regional technique for hip analgesia. Traditionally, intrathecal morphine has been administered for analgesia in hip fracture surgery. Compared with intrathecal morphine, the PENG block may provide superior or equivalent pain score reduction with a more favourable side effect profile and superior patient satisfaction. Methods This is a multicentre blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) that is being conducted at present at two large teaching institutions in Australia. The pericapsular nerve group block (PENG block) shall be compared to low-dose intrathecal morphine for analgesic effect in elective total Hip arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach. Primary outcome shall be dynamic pain score evaluation at 3 and 24 h postoperatively. Discussion This is the protocol of our RCT which is currently in the early stages of active recruitment. Trial registration Ethics approval was obtained from the Southern Area Local Health Network prior to recruitment of the first patient. This trial was prospectively registered prior to initiation on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12623001309673P, 15/12/23, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=386688&showOriginal=true&isReview=true .
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 | 0.036 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.011 |
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".