Pediatric procedural sedation and analgesia

Material and sedation-analgesia in the neonatal lumbar puncture procedure

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar puncture (LP) is a frequent procedure during the neonatal period. Correctly performing this technique can avoid many of its complications.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the LP procedure in neonates in Spanish hospitals, studying the type of material and the sedation-analgesia used.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional study conducted in Spain gathering data through a survey research distributed by email through the Segurneo-SEN Hospital Network and the Spanish Neonatal Society. Data on the LP technique in neonates were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 301 participants were analysed. Most professionals used a trocar needle with a stylet as the first option (89.7%); however, when the LP failed or was blood-stained, 32.2% changed the type of needle. A total of 143 doctors gave their subjective feeling about the type of needle: they only use trocar needles with stylet (41.3%), the technique is easier using scalp-vein needles (32.2%), there is less probability of a blood-stained LP, or failed using scalp-vein needles (7.7%), they choose the type of needle depending on the size of the newborn (10.5%), indifference when using one type or another needle (8.4%). Almost all (99%) of the surveyed doctors used some type of analgesia. The most widely used measures were topical anaesthetics (90.3%) and sucrose (82.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, the LP procedure in the neonatal period is mainly performed with a trocar needle with a stylet and with the widespread use of different analgesic measures.

Procedural moderate sedation with ketamine in pediatric critical care unit

Objective:

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of moderate sedation in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) settings according to moderate sedation protocol using ketamine and midazolam and to determine areas for the improvement in our clinical practice.

Settings and Design:

A retrospective study was conducted in the PICU.

Materials and Methods:

Retrospective chart review was performed for patients who had received moderate sedation between January and the end of December 2011 and who are eligible to inclusion criteria.

Results:

In this study, 246 moderate sedation sessions were included. 5.3% were in infant age, while 94.7% were children (1–14 years). Their gender distributed as 59.8% males and 40.2% females. The majority of them had hematology-oncology disease nature, i.e., 80.89% (n = 199). Lumbar puncture accounted for 65.3% (n = 160) of the producers; the rests were bone marrow aspiration 32.7%, endoscopy 8.2%, and colonoscopy 2.9%. Two doses of ketamine (1–1.5 mg/kg) to achieve moderate sedation during the procedure were given to 44.1% (n = 108) of the patients. One dose of midazolam was given to 77.2% (n = 190), while 1.22% (n = 3) of sessions of moderate sedation was done without any dose of midazolam. Adverse events including apnea, laryngeal spasm, hypotension, and recovery agitation were observed during moderate sedation sessions, and it has been noticed in four sessions, i.e., 1.6%, which were mild to moderate and managed conservatively.

Conclusion:

Moderate sedation in the PICU using ketamine and midazolam is generally safe with minimal side effects as moderate sedation sessions were conducted by pediatric intensivist in highly monitored and equipped environment.

[Material and sedation-analgesia in the neonatal lumbar puncture procedure]

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar puncture (LP) is a frequent procedure during the neonatal period. Correctly performing this technique can avoid many of its complications.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the LP procedure in neonates in Spanish hospitals, studying the type of material and the sedation-analgesia used.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional study conducted in Spain gathering data through a survey research distributed by email through the Segurneo-SEN Hospital Network and the Spanish Neonatal Society. Data on the LP technique in neonates were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 301 participants were analysed. Most professionals used a trocar needle with a stylet as the first option (89.7%); however, when the LP failed or was blood-stained, 32.2% changed the type of needle. A total of 143 doctors gave their subjective feeling about the type of needle: they only use trocar needles with stylet (41.3%), the technique is easier using scalp-vein needles (32.2%), there is less probability of a blood-stained LP, or failed using scalp-vein needles (7.7%), they choose the type of needle depending on the size of the new-born (10.5%), indifference when using one type or another needle (8.4%). Almost all (99%) of the surveyed doctors used some type of analgesia. The most widely used measures were topical anaesthetics (90.3%) and sucrose (82.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, the LP procedure in the neonatal period is mainly performed with a trocar needle with a stylet and with the widespread use of different analgesic measures.

Guidelines for Monitoring and Management of Pediatric Patients Before, During, and After Sedation for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures

The safe sedation of children for procedures requires a systematic approach that includes the following: no administration of sedating medication without the safety net of medical/dental supervision, careful presedation evaluation for underlying medical or surgical conditions that would place the child at increased risk from sedating medications, appropriate fasting for elective procedures and a balance between the depth of sedation and risk for those who are unable to fast because of the urgent nature of the procedure, a focused airway examination for large (kissing) tonsils or anatomic airway abnormalities that might increase the potential for airway obstruction, a clear understanding of the medication's pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects and drug interactions, appropriate training and skills in airway management to allow rescue of the patient, age- and size-appropriate equipment for airway management and venous access, appropriate medications and reversal agents, sufficient numbers of appropriately trained staff to both carry out the procedure and monitor the patient, appropriate physiologic monitoring during and after the procedure, a properly equipped and staffed recovery area, recovery to the presedation level of consciousness before discharge from medical/dental supervision, and appropriate discharge instructions. This report was developed through a collaborative effort of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry to offer pediatric providers updated information and guidance in delivering safe sedation to children.

Systematic Review: Rectal Administration of Medications for Pediatric Procedural Sedation

BACKGROUND

Per rectum (PR) medication delivery is an alternative to traditional oral (PO), intravenous (IV), or intramuscular (IM) administration of medication for procedural sedation of pediatric emergency department patients. However, many emergency physicians are unfamiliar with its use, and there are no widely adopted guidelines or reviews dedicated to this topic.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to provide emergency physicians with an overview of PR procedural sedation medications in pediatric patients.

METHODS

We performed a PubMed literature search of relevant keywords limited to studies of human subjects published in English between January 1, 1990 and December 31, 2017. We excluded case reports, general review articles, editorial/opinion pieces, correspondence, and abstracts. Two of the authors then conducted a structured review of the selected studies.

RESULTS

A total of 315 PubMed citations meeting the search criteria were found. Twenty-eight articles were included for final detailed review. Only 4 of the 28 included studies were conducted in the emergency department setting. A total of 9 different medications have been studied for PR procedural sedation. Sedation effectiveness ranged from 40% to 98%. No life-threatening complications were reported in any of the included clinical trials. Hypoxia was found to occur in up to 10% of those receiving PR sedation.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric procedural sedation with PR medications appears to be feasible, moderately effective, and safe based on our review of the current literature. However, further studies on its applicability in the emergency department setting are needed.

Guidelines for Monitoring and Management of Pediatric Patients Before, During, and After Sedation for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures: Update 2016

The safe sedation of children for procedures requires a systematic approach that includes the following: no administration of sedating medication without the safety net of medical/dental supervision, careful presedation evaluation for underlying medical or surgical conditions that would place the child at increased risk from sedating medications, appropriate fasting for elective procedures and a balance between the depth of sedation and risk for those who are unable to fast because of the urgent nature of the procedure, a focused airway examination for large (kissing) tonsils or anatomic airway abnormalities that might increase the potential for airway obstruction, a clear understanding of the medication's pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects and drug interactions, appropriate training and skills in airway management to allow rescue of the patient, age- and size-appropriate equipment for airway management and venous access, appropriate medications and reversal agents, sufficient numbers of staff to both carry out the procedure and monitor the patient, appropriate physiologic monitoring during and after the procedure, a properly equipped and staffed recovery area, recovery to the presedation level of consciousness before discharge from medical/dental supervision, and appropriate discharge instructions. This report was developed through a collaborative effort of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry to offer pediatric providers updated information and guidance in delivering safe sedation to children.

Outcome of pediatric procedural sedation & analgesia in a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan

Background and Objective:

Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is pharmacologically induced state which allows patients to tolerate painful procedures while maintaining protective reflexes. It is the standard of care but there is limited data from Pakistan. Our objective was to assess the safety of the procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric population at a tertiary care setting.

Methods:

A retrospective notes and record review was conducted at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi over 4 years from April 2010 to August 2014. Patients were between ages 6 months to 16 years and were in low risk category. The combination of Ketamine and Propofol were used. Data collected on the standardized hospital PSA form. All procedures were performed by two trained persons.

Results:

A total of 3489 diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were performed. Satisfactory level of sedation was achieved for 3486 (99%) of procedures. Adverse events occurred in 21 (0.6%) patients including: 12 (0.3%) episodes of hypoxia, 07 (0.2%) episodes of apnea, 02 (0.06%) episodes of post sedation hallucination. No major events were noted.

Conclusion:

Procedural sedation & analgesia for children using Propofol and Ketamine is found safe and effective in our setting.

Comparison of two analgesia protocols for the treatment of pediatric orthopedic emergencies

SummaryObjective:to compare the efficacy of two analgesia protocols (ketamine versus morphine) associated with midazolam for the reduction of dislocations or closed fractures in children.Methods:randomized clinical trial comparing morphine (0.1mg/kg; max 5mg) and ketamine (2.0mg/kg, max 70mg) associated with midazolam (0.2mg/kg; max 10mg) in the reduction of dislocations or closed fractures in children treated at the pediatrics emergency room (October 2010 and September 2011). The groups were compared in terms of the times to perform the procedures, analgesia, parent satisfaction and orthopedic team.Results:13 patients were allocated to ketamine and 12 to morphine, without differences in relation to age, weight, gender, type of injury, and pain scale before the intervention. There was no failure in any of the groups, no differences in time to start the intervention and overall procedure time. The average hospital stay time was similar (ketamine = 10.8+5.1h versus morphine = 12.3+4.4hs; p=0.447). The median pain (faces pain scale) scores after the procedure was 2 in both groups. Amnesia was noted in 92.3% (ketamine) and 83.3% (morphine) (p=0.904). Parents said they were very satisfied in relation to the analgesic intervention (84.6% in the ketamine group and 66.6% in the morphine group; p=0.296). The satisfaction of the orthopedist regarding the intervention was 92.3% in the ketamine group and 75% in the morphine group (p=0.222).Conclusion:by producing results similar to morphine, ketamine can be considered as an excellent option in pain management and helps in the reduction of dislocations and closed fractures in pediatric emergency rooms.

The use of basic parameters for monitoring the haemodynamic effects of midazolam and ketamine as opposed to propofol during cardiac catheterization

OBJECTIVE

Our aim is to compare the haemodynamic and adverse effects of propofol versus the mixture of midazolam and ketamine as used in sedation for cardiac catheterization in children.

METHODS

In a prospective randomized trial, we divided patients needing sedation into 72 receiving a mixture of midazolam and ketamine and 42 receiving propofol. Their ages ranged from 6 months to 12 years, and 1 year to 16 years, respectively. We collected data relative to heart rate, mean arterial pressure, respiratory rate, peripheral saturations of oxygen, and adverse effects. We assessed cyanotic patients to establish any relationship between the haemodynamic data and peripheral arterial saturations of oxygen.

RESULTS

Demographic data, including age, gender, and weight, was not statistically different between the groups. In those receiving midazolam and ketamine, mean systemic arterial pressures before, and 30 minutes after, sedation were 64.3, with standard deviation of 9.8, and 62.5, with standard deviation of 10.2, millimetre of mercury (p equals to 0.237). Heart rates were 131.3, with standard deviation of 13.5, and 109.2, with standard deviation of 17.3 beats per minute, (p less than 0.001) whereas in those given propofol the comparable values were 71.2, with standard deviation of 14.4, and 53.6 with standard deviation of 9.7 millimetres of mercury (p less than 0.001), and 115.2, with standard deviation of 13.6, and 100.5 with standard deviation of 20.1 beats per minute (p less than 0.01), respectively. Mean systemic arterial pressures in the subgroups of cyanotic patients before and 30 minutes after sedation were 74.8, with standard deviation of 14.6, and 72.7, with standard deviation of 12.4 millimetres of mercury for those receiving midazolam and ketamine (p equals to 0.544), and heart rates were 119.3, with standard deviation of 12.2, and 104.6 with standard deviation of 16.1 beats per minute (p equals to 0.001). In those given propofol, the comparable values were 71.1 with deviation of 15.5 and 53.9 with deviation of 9.2 millimetres of mercury (p equals to 0.001), and 126.7 with deviation of 20.8 and 107.2 with deviation of 13.5 beats per minute (p equals to 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In cyanotic children, propofol used as a sedative agent during cardiac catheterization causes a decrease in mean arterial pressure and arterial desaturation. Ketamine produces more stable haemodynamic data in children with congenitally malformed hearts.

The role of sedation in contemporary pediatric dentistry

Procedural sedation offers an effective and humane way to deliver dental care to the young, anxious child and to those with extensive treatment needs. Delivery of sedation requires thorough understanding of its indications and contraindications, patient assessment, pharmacology, monitoring, and office protocol. Safe and successful outcomes depend on a systematic approach to care, and the ability to manage unintended cardiopulmonary events.

[Do paediatricians perform lumbar puncture correctly? Review of recommendations and analysis the technique in Spain]

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar puncture (LP) is a commonly performed procedure in paediatrics. Performing this technique properly can avoid the most common associated complications.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether paediatricians and paediatric residents in Spain follow current recommendations for the LP technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted by sending a questionnaire by mail through the Spanish Society of Paediatric Emergencies, collecting demographic information and responses to multiple choice questions about LP technique.

RESULTS

A total of 206 questionnaires were analysed, of which 143 (69.5%) were answered by paediatricians, and 63 (30.5%) by paediatric residents. The majority (128; 62.1%) of physicians did not allow parents to be present during LP, 198 (96.1%) routinely use analgesia and sedation; 84 (42%) only used local anaesthesia. The majority of respondents used standard Quincke needles (126; 62.7%). The bevel was correctly positioned when puncturing the dura mater by 22 residents (36.1%) and 21 paediatricians (15.1%), a variation that was statistically significant (P=.001). For neonatal lumbar punctures, 63 paediatricians (46%) and 19 paediatric residents used a butterfly needle which did not contain a stylet, and this difference was also statistically significant (P=.035). Of those surveyed, 190 (92.2%) re-inserted the stylet when re-orientating the needle, and 186 (93%) re-oriented this when removing it. The recommendation of bed rest was made by 195 (94.7%) physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of paediatricians orient the bevel wrongly when inserting the needle during LP, and still use "butterfly" needles in newborns, despite warnings to the contrary. Paediatric residents and less experienced paediatricians follow the recommendations more frequently.

Sedation provider practice variation: a survey analysis of pediatric emergency subspecialists and fellows

OBJECTIVES

Pediatric emergency physicians use various techniques and medications when performing procedural sedation and analgesia. The goals of our study were to assess US pediatric emergency medicine subspecialists and fellows (PEMSSFs) for individual practice variation and to evaluate (1) the use of supplemental oxygen and capnography monitoring and (2) adverse sedation events (ADSEs).

METHODS

A Web-based tool was used to survey and analyze data collected from a selected group of PEMSSFs, regarding their responses to 5 common sedation case scenarios, use of supplemental oxygen and capnography monitoring, and ADSEs. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between medication strategy and various levels of professional experience.

RESULTS

Two hundred one surveys were received. One hundred ninety-five of these were eligible for the study: 140 from specialists and 55 from fellows. Respondents used multiple combinations of pharmaceutical agents to the scenarios presented. For some scenarios, statistical association was found between medication selection strategy and longer professional experience. Sixty percent of respondents do not routinely provide oxygen supplementation. Despite current guidelines supporting the routine use of capnography monitoring, 45% of respondents never use it. Adverse sedation event was reported in 17 cases; all patients were discharged with no further complications. A statistical association was found between years of practitioner experience and the likelihood of reporting an ADSE (P < 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

This group of PEMSSFs reported a wide spectrum of medication sedation strategies, dichotomous approaches to the use of oxygen supplementation and capnography monitoring, and a low rate of ADSEs.

Sedoanalgesia in paediatric intensive care: a survey of 19 Italian units

AIM

To analyse the methods used to manage and monitor sedoanalgesia at Italian paediatric intensive care units (ICUs).

METHODS

Data were collected by administering a questionnaire that aimed to investigate whether ICUs adopted a validated protocol to manage sedoanalgesia.

RESULTS

The results revealed that a majority of the ICUs adopt a protocol for dealing with sedation and analgesia, but this protocol is implemented with difficulty or not at all in routine clinical practice. The most often used pharmacological combination, is midazolam and fentanyl. Several weaknesses remain in terms of the methods used to assess sedoanalgesia, which are generally not standardized, but rather based on recording the patient's physiological parameters.

CONCLUSION

Sedation and analgesia are priority issues in the management of critically ill children. None of the numerous drugs available is ideal and the protocols currently used in clinical practice involve the combined use of different drugs. There is currently no shared and validated approach as to which is the most effective and safest sedoanalgesic regimen in critically ill children.

Analgesia and sedation for painful interventions in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Painful procedures on children and adolescents often have to be performed with the aid of analgesia and sedation in order to prevent pain and emotional distress. Moreover, many procedures can be performed more rapidly and more effectively in a relaxed patient. Because the combination of analgesia and sedation can cause serious or even life-threatening complications, it must be accompanied by the same safety precautions as a general anesthetic.

METHODS

Selective review of the literature.

RESULTS

A high level of safety can be achieved by adherence to the published guidelines of the societies for anesthesiology and pediatrics. The depth of sedation during procedures performed under combined analgesia and sedation is often equivalent to that resulting from general anesthesia. Therefore, in order to avoid serious complications, combined analgesia and sedation should only be administered by physicians trained in pediatric anesthesia or pediatric critical care. This is particularly so when propofol is used, because it has a narrow therapeutic range and can cause cardiorespiratory respiratory problems without warning. As long as the appropriate safety precautions are followed, non-anesthesiologists can also administer propofol in combination with an analgesic, such as ketamine, to children and adolescents.

CONCLUSION

In children and adolescents, the combination of analgesia and sedation can prevent the emotional trauma that would result from a painful procedure, while often enhancing the quality of the procedure itself. This method should be considered a variant of general anesthesia. Accordingly, any non-anesthesiologist employing this method must be as well versed as an anesthesiologist in the management of its specific side effects and complications.

Comparison of methohexital and pentobarbital as sedative agents for pediatric emergency department patients for computed tomography

OBJECTIVES

To determine if there are differences in the duration of sedation between pediatric emergency department (PED) patients receiving methohexital and PED patients receiving pentobarbital for the purpose of obtaining a head computed tomographic (CT) scan.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of PED patients receiving either methohexital or pentobarbital for a sedated head CT. Data were collected on patient demographics and medical condition, indications for head CT, duration of sedation, medication dosage, and medication adverse events. Primary analyses investigated whether there were differences between the 2 groups. Secondary analysis determined whether the need for additional sedative doses contributed to observed differences between groups.

RESULTS

The patients receiving methohexital completed their head CT more quickly and needed less total sedation monitoring than those receiving pentobarbital. The need for additional doses of medication does not appear to be responsible for the observed difference. Adverse medication events were minor and comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Methohexital may be superior to pentobarbital for the purpose of sedating PED patients for head CT.

Clinical management for epidermolysis bullosa dystrophica

Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) consists of a group of genetic hereditary disorders in which patients frequently present fragile skin and mucosa that form blisters following minor trauma. More than 20 subtypes of EB have been recognized in the literature. Specific genetic mutations are well characterized for most the different EB subtypes and variants. The most common oral manifestations of EB are painful blisters affecting all the oral surfaces. Dental treatment for patients with EB consists of palliative therapy for its oral manifestations along with typical restorative and periodontal procedures. The aim of this article is to describe two dental clinical treatments of recessive dystrophic EB cases and their specific clinical manifestations. The psychological intervention required during the dental treatment of these patients is also presented.

Use of dexmedetomidine for sedation of children hospitalized in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is a potentially useful sedative for hospitalized children, but there is little published data regarding its safety, dosage, or efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

To report our experience with dexmedetomidine for the sedation of hospitalized children.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

SETTING

Pediatric ICU of a university-affiliated children's hospital.

PATIENTS

We retrospectively examined data from the medical records of all children who received dexmedetomidine for sedation between December 2003 and October 2005.

INTERVENTION

None.

RESULTS

Dexmedetomidine was administered 74 times to 60 children (median age 1.5 years, range 0.1-17.2 years). The most common indications for ICU admission were respiratory distress/failure (53%), status-postcorrective cardiac surgery (19%), and other postoperative patients (18%). In 53% of cases dexmedetomidine was used to supplement ongoing sedation judged inadequate and in 41% of cases it was used as a bridge to extubation while other sedatives were weaned or discontinued. Among all the children, the median dose to maintain adequate sedation was 0.7 microg/kg per hour (range 0.2-2.5 microg/kg per hour), with a median duration of therapy of 23 hours (range 3-451 hours). Most children (80%) experienced no adverse effects from the sedation, with hypotension (9%), hypertension (8%), and bradycardia (3%) the most common adverse events. For 93% of children who experienced a side effect, it resolved either without treatment or by withholding the infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of children hospitalized in the ICU, dexmedetomidine appeared to be effective and to have few adverse effects. Dexmedetomidine may have a potentially useful role to play in sedating hospitalized children.

The management of pain in children with life-limiting illnesses

The management of pain in children with life-limiting illnesses is complex and unfortunately not often done effectively. Pain is a multidimensional symptom that can overshadow all other experiences of both the child and family. This article focuses on topics common to practitioners caring for children with lifelimiting illnesses, including a review of myths and obstacles to achieving adequate pain control, a review of the pathophysiology of pain, an overview of the use of opioids in children, an approach to the management of neuropathic pain, and a brief discussion of nonpharmacologic pain management strategies.