Oral midazolam for conscious sedation of children during minor procedures

Effect of adenoid size on the post-adenoidectomy hypernasality in children with a normal palate

PURPOSE

Adenoidectomy, either alone or with tonsillectomy, is a common surgical procedure in the field of pediatric otorhinolaryngology. Resonance function may be altered postoperatively in the form of hypernasality, which is usually transient. This study aimed to investigate the effect of adenoid size on post-adenoidectomy hypernasality in children with a normal palate.

METHODS

Seventy-one children with different degrees of adenoid hypertrophy were included in this prospective observational study. Endoscopic assessment of the adenoid size and preoperative and postoperative evaluation of speech (at 1 and 3 months) with auditory perceptual assessment (APA) and nasometry were performed.

RESULTS

APA showed preoperative hyponasality in 59.1% of children and was found to be significantly related to the adenoid size, with more hyponasality in grades 3 and 4. One month postoperatively, hypernasality was detected in 26.7% of patients and was found to be related to the preoperative adenoid size with higher hypernasality in grades 3 and 4. Three months postoperatively, all patients had gained normal nasality except one (1.4%) who was subjected to a longer follow-up period. Nasometric assessment showed significant differences at the three visits (pre, 1, and 3 months postoperatively), with a negative correlation between the grade of adenoid size and nasalance scores preoperatively and a significant positive correlation between them at 1 month postoperatively. However, no significant correlation was detected at 3 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Transient hypernasality may develop in some patients after adenoidectomy, especially in children with a larger preoperative adenoid size. However, transient hypernasality generally resolves spontaneously within 3 months.

Physician Self-Reported Practice Patterns: Midazolam for Minor Procedures in Pediatric Patients

Midazolam is frequently used as a single agent to provide minimal sedation (also called anxiolysis) when performing procedures in minor children. Published guidelines on the optimal use of intranasal (INM) and oral midazolam (POM) are lacking. The purpose of this study is to explore the self-reported physician practice related to midazolam use in facilitating minor procedures in children. We developed a survey that was approved by the Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine (APP-SOEM) and was then electronically distributed via its listserve. Questions were posed about the therapeutic and maximum dosing of INM and POM, consideration of Nothing-By-Mouth (NPO) status, use of cardiopulmonary monitors, as well as discharge criteria. There was a 47% (218/465) response rate. For therapeutic INM doses, 65% of responders used a dose range of 0.3 to 0.6 mg/kg, and 75% selected a maximum dose of 10 mg irrespective of the child's weight. About 20% of the responders selected a dosage range of 0.7 to 1 mg/kg for therapeutic POM dose, with 43% opting for a maximum dose of 20 mg irrespective of the child's weight. We observed a dichotomous variation in reported physician use of cardiopulmonary monitors; 42% never employ monitors, and the remainder used monitors some of the time. There was consensus on the NPO status and discharge criteria; 80% of physicians did not consider NPO status prior to midazolam use. The level of alertness was the most commonly selected discharge criterion. This nationwide survey of physicians indicates practice variation with midazolam dosing and cardiopulmonary monitor usage when performing minor procedures in children. Implementing practice guidelines, specifically for minimal sedation with mainstay agents such as midazolam, may standardize physician practice and improve overall patient care.

Analysis of the factors affecting pain level during K-wire removal among pediatric elbow fractures

Our aim was, to analyze the reasons for possible increased pain during the removal of the Kirschner wires from the elbows of children. From February 2021 to December 2021, 573 patients with elbow fractures were treated. In total, 150 patients were analyzed prospectively. No action was taken to reduce pain during the removal of Kirschner wires. The pain status of the patients was evaluated according to the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating scoring system (WBAS), the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for the pain system and the pulse and oxygen saturation measured by the pulse oximeter on the finger. Measurements were performed before, during, immediately after and 30 min after the procedure. There were 119 patients with a diagnosis of supracondylar humerus fracture and 31 patients with a diagnosis of lateral condyle fracture. The mean age of treated patients was 7.1 years (1-15 years). Of the patients, 93 were boys and 57 were girls. In the measurements made according to the sex difference, it was determined that there was a statistically significant increase in the WBAS scores measured both before the procedure ( P  = 0.032) and during the removal ( P  = 0.017), and also in the pulse measurements taken 30 min after the removal in girls ( P  = 0.034). A statistically significant difference was found in both the WBAS score during removal ( P  = 0.025) and the NRS scores 30 min later ( P  = 0.048) in the procedures performed on the right elbow. We found a statistically significant increase in the pain parameters we evaluated in girls, right extremity fractures, the group over 8 years old and when both parents were with the child during the K-wire removal procedure. In light of these findings, physicians should consider the above-mentioned conditions before starting the procedure to ensure a less painful and positive experience.

Comparative Evaluation of Ease of Dental Treatment and Clinical Efficiency of Midazolam vs Midazolam and Ketamine Combination for Sedation in Young Uncooperative Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review

Aim

To assess and compare the effectiveness of midazolam vs midazolam and ketamine combination in the management of young uncooperative pediatric patients.

Materials and methods

The research question was developed by using population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design framework. The literature search was performed using three electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCOhost. The risk of bias of the studies was independently appraised using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

Results

Out of 98 preliminary records, five studies were selected for analysis. Three hundred forty-six uncooperative children were randomized through the five randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a mean age of 5.8 years. Midazolam with ketamine was the most successful combination for delivering rapid and sufficient analgosedation in uncooperative children. The clinical efficiency of midazolam and ketamine combination had an overall success rate of 84% when compared to ketamine and midazolam alone. 50% of children in the midazolam and ketamine group demonstrated calm behavior, compared to 37% in the midazolam group. 44% of the children experienced modest intra and/or postoperative adverse effects that did not necessitate any special treatment.

Conclusion

Midazolam and ketamine combination is more efficient than midazolam alone with respect to ease of treatment and clinical efficiency.

How to cite this article

Rathi GV, Padawe D, Takate V, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Ease of Dental Treatment and Clinical Efficiency of Midazolam vs Midazolam and Ketamine Combination for Sedation in Young Uncooperative Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022;15(6):680-686.

Intranasal Midazolam Premedication for Anxiolysis in Children Reluctant to Receive Nitrous Oxide Sedation via Nasal Hood: An In Vivo Randomized Control Trial

Aim and objective

The aim of the study was to compare administration of 0.1 mg/kg intranasal midazolam as premedication against a normal saline control in alleviating anxiety relating to and increasing acceptance of nasal hood by child patients receiving nitrous oxide sedation.

Materials and methods

After ethical clearance and informed consent, on the basis of odd and even numbers patients were allocated to group midazolam (group M) or group normal saline (group N), respectively. The physical parameters were recorded at the beginning and after the procedure; time required for the procedure was also recorded. The level of cooperation during acceptance of the nasal mask by the patient was evaluated using the four-point scale.

Result

Group M (midazolam premedication) was more effective in improving the acceptance of the nasal hood in children than the normal saline/traditional/conventional method of treating the teeth. The p -value is .002308.

Conclusion

In the present study the combination of midazolam and nitrous oxide proved to be an effective combination, resulting in good to excellent behavior in children who were Frankl's behavior rating definitely negative and negative.

Clinical significance

For successful sedation premedication with nitrous oxide, midazolam is an excellent premedication drug.

How to cite this article

Musani I, Bhure S, Choubey S, et al. Intranasal Midazolam Premedication for Anxiolysis in Children Reluctant to Receive Nitrous Oxide Sedation via Nasal Hood: An In Vivo Randomized Control Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(S-2):S138-S142.

A randomized double-blinded controlled trial comparing ultrasound-guided versus conventional injection for caudal block in children undergoing infra-umbilical surgeries

Background and Aims:

Caudal epidural block is widely used in pediatric surgeries to provide intraoperative and postoperative analgesia in infra-umbilical surgeries. The conventional technique involves the risk of multiple punctures and other complications such as dural puncture, vascular puncture, and intraosseous injection.

Material and Methods:

Around 106 children aged between 6 months to 10 years belonging to ASA class I-II scheduled for elective infra-umbilical surgeries were included after obtaining written informed consent from parents/guardians. All children were randomized into two groups: ultrasound-guided (Group U) or conventional caudal group (Group C). All were premedicated with oral midazolam and inhalational induction was done with oxygen and 6–8% sevoflurane. Caudal block of 1 mL/kg of 0.125% bupivacaine was administered in both groups. The primary outcome assessed was 1^st puncture success rate and the secondary outcomes assessed were number of skin punctures, block performing time, and block success rate.

Results:

Group U had a higher first puncture success rate (P = 0.001) than Group C (90.6% v/s 64.2%) and was statistically significant. The number of punctures were significantly less (P = 0.01) in Group U (1.09 ± 0.295) than Group C (1.45 ± 0.667). Block performing time was significantly higher (P = 0.0005) in Group U (53.19 ± 10.97 s) than Group C (30.34 ± 7.34 s). There was no difference in the overall block success rate between the groups (98.1% v/s 100%).

Conclusion:

Ultrasound-guided caudal injection increases the first puncture success rate and decreases the number of punctures required compared to conventional caudal block in pediatric infra-umbilical surgeries.

Comparison of Analgesic Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominus Plane Block and Caudal Block for Inguinal Hernia Repair in Pediatric Population: A Single-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Study

Background:

Caudal analgesia was a widely practiced regional anesthesia technique in pediatric population. Transversus abdominus plane block (TAP) block has recently emerged as a promising analgesic method in pediatric lower abdominal surgeries.

Aim:

This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided TAP block and caudal block.

Setting:

This study was conducted in the department of anesthesiology of a tertiary care teaching hospital.

Design:

This was a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled study.

Materials and Methods:

Sixty-two children of American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I and II undergoing inguinal hernia repair received TAP block at a dose of 0.5 ml.kg^{− 1} of 0.25% bupivacaine (Group A) or caudal block at a dose of 1 ml.kg^{− 1} of 0.25% bupivacaine (Group B) after randomization. The children were analyzed by comparing the post operative pain scores and duration of analgesia. Statistical analysis was done with IBM SPSS software 23 version. Unpaired sample t-test and Mann–Whitney U-test were used to compare the means of continuous variables. Fisher's exact test/Chi-square test was used to find the association between categorical variables.

Results:

Both groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, weight, and surgery duration. Duration of analgesia was longer in TAP block group compared to that of caudal analgesia (12.93 ± 2.91 h vs. 6.52 ± 1.67 P < 0.001). The postoperative pain scores were comparable up to 6 h and at 24 h. Pain scores at 12 h and 18 h were significantly higher in caudal analgesia group compared to that of TAP block group.

Conclusion:

Children who received TAP block had prolonged duration of analgesia and lower pain scores compared to those who received caudal analgesia.

Midazolam Orally for Sedation during Pediatric Intrathecal Chemotherapy: Unmet Need of Distress-Free Procedures for Cancer Kids in India

Preprocedural sedation is the part of standard operating procedures for pediatric intrathecal chemotherapy in developed countries and uses predominantly intravenous route. In India, due to the limited availability of pediatric oncology facilities and the increased patient numbers at those centers, no such intervention is possible. This article discusses this issue and proposes the use of oral midazolam in this context for large-scale utilization.

A Retrospective Review of a Bed-mounted Projection System for Managing Pediatric Preoperative Anxiety

Introduction:

Most children undergoing anesthesia experience significant preoperative anxiety. We developed a bedside entertainment and relaxation theater (BERT) as an alternative to midazolam for appropriate patients undergoing anesthesia. The primary aim of this study was to determine if BERT was as effective as midazolam in producing cooperative patients at anesthesia induction. Secondary aims reviewed patient emotion and timeliness of BERT utilization.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients undergoing anesthesia at Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital Stanford between February 1, 2016, and October 1, 2016. Logistic regression compared induction cooperation between groups. Multinomial logistic regression compared patients’ emotion at induction. Ordinary least squares regression compared preoperative time.

Results:

Of the 686 eligible patients, 163 were in the BERT group and 150 in the midazolam. Ninety-three percentage of study patients (290/313) were cooperative at induction, and the BERT group were less likely to be cooperative (P = 0.04). The BERT group was more likely to be “playful” compared with “sedated” (P < 0.001). There was a reduction of 14.7 minutes in preoperative patient readiness associated with BERT (P = 0.001).

Conclusions:

Although most patients were cooperative for induction in both groups, the midazolam group was more cooperative. The BERT reduced the preinduction time and was associated with an increase in patients feeling “playful.”

Oral Sedation in the Dental Office

This article highlights the commonly used medications used in dentistry and oral surgery. General dentists and specialists must be knowledgeable about the pharmacology of the drugs currently available along with their risks and benefits. Enteral sedation is a useful adjunct for the treatment of anxious adult and pediatric patients. When enteral sedation is used within the standards of care, the interests of the public and the dental profession are served through a cost-effective, effective service that can be widely available. Oral sedation enables dentists to provide dental care to millions of individuals who otherwise would have unmet dental needs.

What is the level of evidence for the amnestic effects of sedatives in pediatric patients? A systematic review and meta-analyses

Background

Studies have suggested that benzodiazepines are amnestic drug par excellence, but when taken together, what level of evidence do they generate? Are other sedatives as amnestic as benzodiazepines? The aim of this study was to assess the level of scientific evidence for the amnestic effect of sedatives in pediatric patients who undergo health procedures.

Methods

The literature was searched to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated anterograde and retrograde amnesia in 1-19-year-olds who received sedative drugs during health procedures. Electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Library besides clinical trial registries and grey literature were searched. Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Collaboration's Tool. The meta-analyses were performed by calculating relative risk (RR) to 95% confidence intervals (CI). The quality of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

Results

Fifty-four studies were included (4,168 participants). A higher occurrence of anterograde amnesia was observed when benzodiazepines, the most well-studied sedatives (n = 47), were used than when placebo was used (n = 12) (RR = 3.10; 95% CI: 2.30–4.19, P<0.001; I² = 14%), with a moderate level of evidence. Higher doses of alpha2-adrenergic agonists (clonidine/dexmedetomidine) produced more anterograde amnesia than lower doses (n = 2) (RR = 1.83; 95% CI: 1.03–3.25; P = 0.038; I² = 0%), with a low level of evidence; benzodiazepines’ amnestic effects were not dose-dependent (n = 3) (RR = 1.54; 95% CI: 0.96–2.49; P = 0.07; I² = 12%) but the evidence was low. A qualitative analysis showed that retrograde amnesia did not occur in 8 out of 10 studies.

Conclusions

In children, moderate evidence support that benzodiazepines induce anterograde amnesia, whereas the evidence for other sedatives is weak and based on isolated and small studies. Further clinical trials focused on the amnesia associated with non-benzodiazepine sedatives are therefore needed.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42015017559.

Optimal Volume of Administration of Intranasal Midazolam in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The optimal intranasal volume of administration for achieving timely and effective sedation in children is unclear. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes relevant to procedural sedation associated with using escalating volumes of administration to administer intranasal midazolam.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, single-blinded, 3-arm, superiority clinical trial. Children aged 1 to 7 years and undergoing laceration repair requiring 0.5 mg/kg intranasal midazolam (5 mg/mL) were block-randomized to receive midazolam using 1 of 3 volumes of administration: 0.2, 0.5, or 1 mL. Procedures were videotaped, with outcome assessors blinded to volume of administration. Primary outcome was time to onset of minimal sedation (ie, score of 1 on the University of Michigan Sedation Scale). Secondary outcomes included procedural distress, time to procedure start, deepest level of sedation achieved, adverse events, and clinician and caregiver satisfaction.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine children were enrolled; 96 were analyzed for the primary outcome and secondary outcomes, except for the outcome of procedural distress, for which only 90 were analyzed. Time to onset of minimal sedation for each escalating volume of administration was 4.7 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8 to 5.4 minutes), 4.3 minutes (95% CI 3.9 to 4.9 minutes), and 5.2 minutes (95% CI 4.6 to 7.0 minutes), respectively. There were no differences in secondary outcomes except for clinician satisfaction with ease of administration: fewer clinicians were satisfied when using a volume of administration of 0.2 mL.

CONCLUSION

There was a slightly shorter time to onset of minimal sedation when a volume of administration of 0.5 mL was used compared with 1 mL, but all 3 volumes of administration produced comparable clinical outcomes. Fewer clinicians were satisfied with ease of administration with a volume of administration of 0.2 mL.

Incidence of adverse events in paediatric procedural sedation in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the incidence of adverse events in the emergency department (ED) during procedural sedation in the paediatric population. Randomised controlled trials and observational studies from the past 10 years were included. We adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

SETTING

ED.

PARTICIPANTS

Children.

INTERVENTIONS

Procedural sedation.

OUTCOMES

Adverse events like vomiting, agitation, hypoxia and apnoea. Meta-analysis was performed with random-effects model and reported as incidence rates with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 1177 studies were retrieved for screening and 258 were selected for full-text review. 41 studies reporting on 13 883 procedural sedations in 13 876 children (≤18 years) were included. The most common adverse events (all reported per 1000 sedations) were: vomiting 55.5 (CI 45.2 to 65.8), agitation 17.9 (CI 12.2 to 23.7), hypoxia 14.8 (CI 10.2 to 19.3) and apnoea 7.1 (CI 3.2 to 11.0). The need to intervene with either bag valve mask, oral airway or positive pressure ventilation occurred in 5.0 per 1000 sedations (CI 2.3 to 7.6). The incidences of severe respiratory events were: 34 cases of laryngospasm among 8687 sedations (2.9 per 1000 sedations, CI 1.1 to 4.7; absolute rate 3.9 per 1000 sedations), 4 intubations among 9136 sedations and 0 cases of aspiration among 3326 sedations. 33 of the 34 cases of laryngospasm occurred in patients who received ketamine.

CONCLUSIONS

Serious adverse respiratory events are very rare in paediatric procedural sedation in the ED. Emesis and agitation are the most frequent adverse events. Hypoxia, a late indicator of respiratory depression, occurs in 1.5% of sedations. Laryngospasm, though rare, happens most frequently with ketamine. The results of this study provide quantitative risk estimates to facilitate shared decision-making, risk communication, informed consent and resource allocation in children undergoing procedural sedation in the ED.

Efficacy of oral ketamine compared to midazolam for sedation of children undergoing laceration repair: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of oral ketamine versus oral midazolam for sedation during laceration repair at a pediatric emergency department.

METHODS

Children between 1 and 10 years requiring laceration repair were randomly assigned to 2 groups, treated either with oral midazolam (0.7 mg/kg) or with oral ketamine (5 mg/kg).Main outcomes measured were level of pain during local anesthesia, as assessed by the parent on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) and the number of children who required intravenous sedation. Secondary outcomes included VAS by physician, pain assessment by child, maximal sedation depth assessed by the University of Michigan Sedation Scale, time until University of Michigan Sedation Scale 2 or more, general satisfaction of a parent and treating physician, length of procedure, total sedation time, and the incidence of any adverse events.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight children were recruited of which 33 were girls. Average age was 5.08 ± 2.14 years. Thirty-seven children were treated with ketamine and 31 with midazolam. Parent-assessed VAS in ketamine treated patients was 5.07 ± 0.75 compared with 3.68 ± 0.7 in midazolam treated patients [mean difference = 1.39 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.47 to 3.26]. Twelve (32%) of the children treated with ketamine required the addition of IV sedation compared to only 2 children (6%) of the children treated with midazolam [odds ratio (adjusted for age and gender) 6.1, 95% CI: 1.2 to 30.5]. The rest of the measured variables were similar between the groups, with no statistical significance.

DISCUSSION

No difference in the level of pain was found between ketamine and midazolam treated patients. Compared with oral midazolam (0.7 mg/kg), oral ketamine (5 mg/kg) was associated with higher rates of sedation failure, and thus is not recommended as a single agent for oral sedation in children requiring laceration repair.

Oral Midazolam-Ketamine versus Midazolam alone for Procedural Sedation of Children Undergoing Computed Tomography; a Randomized Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

Motion artifacts are a common problem in pediatric radiographic studies and are a common indication for pediatric procedural sedation. This study aimed to compare the combination of oral midazolam and ketamine (OMK) with oral midazolam alone (OM) as procedural sedatives among children undergoing computed tomography (CT) imaging.

METHODS

The study population was comprised of six-month to six-year old patients with medium-risk minor head trauma, who were scheduled to undergo brain CT imaging. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: one group received 0.5 mg/kg midazolam (OM group; n = 33) orally and the other one received 0.2 mg/kg midazolam and 5 mg/kg ketamine orally (OMK group; n=33). The vital signs were monitored and recorded at regular intervals. The primary outcome measure was the success rate of each drug in achieving adequate sedation. Secondary outcome measures were the time to achieve adequate sedation, time to discharge from radiology department, and the incidence of adverse events.

RESULTS

Adequate sedation was achieved in five patients (15.2%) in OM group and 15 patients (45.5%) in OMK group, which showed a statistically significant difference between the groups (p = 0.015). No significant difference was noted between OM and OMK groups with respect to the time of achieving adequate sedation (33.80 ± 7.56 and 32.87 ± 10.18 minutes, respectively; p = 0.854) and the time of discharging from radiology department (89.60 ± 30.22 and 105.27 ± 21.98 minutes, respectively; p=0.223). The complications were minor and similar among patients of both groups.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that in comparison with OM, OMK was more effective in producing a satisfactory level of sedation in children undergoing CT examinations without additional complications; however, none of these two regimens fulfilled clinical needs for procedural sedation.

Successful flumazenil reversal of paradoxical reaction to midazolam in a child

BACKGROUND

Greater attention to and management of anxiety and pain in pediatric patients signifies a healthy evolution in the care of children in emergency departments (EDs). Interventions to address such distress may involve unanticipated adverse effects. Midazolam, a benzodiazepine commonly administered to children for anxiolysis, may precipitate paradoxical agitation and delirium, a rare but alarming effect that warrants prompt identification and treatment.

CASE REPORT

The case presented is that of a 4-year-old girl who received oral midazolam and developed a paradoxical reaction, which was reversed successfully with flumazenil. This is the first such case report in an ED involving a child. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Emergency physicians must stay abreast of the adverse and unintended effects of the treatments provided. The literature on benzodiazepine-induced paradoxical reactions is reviewed, and flumazenil as well as other treatment options and anxiolytic alternatives are presented.

Comparison of oral and buccal midazolam for pediatric dental sedation: a randomized, cross-over, clinical trial for efficacy, acceptance and safety

OBJECTIVE

Providing a safe and efficient dental treatment for a young patient is a challenge for the dentist and the child. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of buccal midazolam in dental pediatric patients and to compare it with oral Midazolam.

METHODS

Eighteen uncooperative healthy children aged 2.5-6 years were randomized to each of buccal midazolam (0.3mg/kg) or oral midazolam (0.5mg/kg) at the first visit, the alternative has been used at the second visit in a cross-over manner. The study took place at pediatric dentistry clinic of Shahed University, Tehran, from November 2011 to June 2012. The patients' vital signs and behavioral scores were recorded. The patient, the operator and the observer were blinded to the applied medication. Post operatively, patients' and parents' satisfaction were assessed by Visual Analogue Score and a questionnaire respectively. The P-value was set at 0.05 for significance level.

FINDINGS

There were no significant differences in physiologic factors in the medication groups at time 0, 10, 20, 30 minutes and discharge. There was also no significant difference between the two groups in behavioral parameters. The majority of parents rated both sedative agents as "effective" or "very effective" and their children mostly were without anxiety or with minor anxiety.

CONCLUSION

Buccal midazolam may be safely and efficiently used in sedation of pediatric dental patients.

Common office procedures and analgesia considerations

This article reviews common office procedures and analgesia considerations for pediatric outpatients. Layer times of onset of analgesics to coincide with procedures. Pediatric procedural distress is multimodal. Always address parent and child fear and attention, along with pain.

A randomized clinical trial comparing oral, aerosolized intranasal, and aerosolized buccal midazolam

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We determine whether aerosolized intranasal or buccal midazolam reduces the distress of pediatric laceration repair compared with oral midazolam.

METHODS

Children aged 0.5 to 7 years and needing nonparenteral sedation for laceration repair were randomized to receive oral, aerosolized intranasal, or aerosolized buccal midazolam. Patient distress was rated by blinded review of videotapes, using the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Score. Secondary outcomes included activity scores, sedation adequacy, sedation onset, satisfaction, and adverse events.

RESULTS

For the 169 subjects (median age 3.1 years) evaluated for the primary outcome, we found significantly less distress in the buccal midazolam group compared with the oral route group (P=.04; difference -2; 95% confidence interval -4 to 0) and a corresponding nonsignificant trend for the intranasal route (P=.08; difference -1; 95% confidence interval -3 to 1). Secondary outcomes (177 subjects) favored the intranasal group, including a greater proportion of patients with an optimal activity score (74%), a greater proportion of parents wanting this sedation in the future, and faster sedation onset. Intranasal was the route least tolerated at administration. Adverse events were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

When comparing the administration of midazolam by 3 routes to facilitate pediatric laceration repair, we observed slightly less distress in the aerosolized buccal group. The intranasal route demonstrated a greater proportion of patients with optimal activity scores, greater proportions of parents wanting similar sedation in the future, and faster onset but was also the most poorly tolerated at administration. Aerosolized buccal or intranasal midazolam represents an effective and useful alternative to oral midazolam for sedation for laceration repair.

Oral midazolam for removal of Kirschner wires in the children's orthopaedic outpatient department: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Use of Kirschner wires (K-wires) is common in pediatric elbow fracture treatment. We investigate whether anxiety levels at removal of wires may be reduced using oral midazolam.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized controlled trial with 2 groups, with midazolam and with placebo.

RESULTS

Forty-two children with an average age of 7.1 years (range, 3.6-12.3 y) had complete documentation for analysis. The change in anxiety scores was not significantly different between the 2 groups. Forty-five percent of children in the midazolam group had reduced anxiety levels compared with 18% of children given placebo, but this difference was not significant (P=0.102). The anxiety scores before and after wire removal in the midazolam group were not significantly different from the placebo group scores.

CONCLUSIONS

We do not recommend the routine administration of midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) to all children requiring K-wire removal in the outpatient department.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Comparison of the effects of ketamine, ketamine-medetomidine, and ketamine-midazolam on physiologic parameters and anesthesia-induced stress in rhesus (Macaca mulatta) and cynomolgus (Macaca fascicularis) macaques

This study compared the cardiovascular, respiratory, anesthetic, and glucocorticoid effects of ketamine alone with ketamine-medetomidine and ketamine-midazolam in rhesus and cynomolgus macaques. Macaques were given either intramuscular ketamine (10 mg/kg), intramuscular ketamine-medetomidine (3 mg/kg; 0.15 mg/kg), or oral midazolam (1 mg/kg) followed by intramuscular ketamine (8 mg/kg). The addition of medetomidine, but not midazolam, provided muscle relaxation and abolishment of reflexes that was superior to ketamine alone. In addition, medetomidine did not cause clinically relevant effects on cardiovascular and respiratory parameters when compared with ketamine. These 3 protocols did not have significantly different effects on fecal glucocorticoid metabolites. These results suggest that medetomidine can be a valuable addition to ketamine for healthy patients, whereas oral midazolam at the tested dose does not provide additional benefits.

What is the nature of the emergence phenomenon when using intravenous or intramuscular ketamine for paediatric procedural sedation?

OBJECTIVE

Ketamine has become the drug most favoured by emergency physicians for sedation of children in the ED. Some emergency physicians do not use ketamine for paediatric procedural sedation (PPS) because of concern about emergence delirium on recovery. The present study set out to determine the true incidence and nature of this phenomenon.

METHODS

Prospective data relating to any emergence agitation, crying, hallucinations, dreams, altered perceptions, delirium and necessary interventions were recorded in consecutive cases of ketamine PPS from March 2002 to June 2007, and analysed. Standard inclusion and exclusion criteria for the use of ketamine were followed.

RESULTS

A total of 745 prospective data collection records were available for analysis over the 5 year period. Of all, 93 (12.5%) children cried on awakening when recovering from PPS, 291 (39%) experienced pleasant altered perceptions and 16 (2.1%) experienced what was called 'emergence delirium'. None required any active treatment and all except one settled within 20 min. There was no evidence of an increased rate of nightmares on telephone follow up in the weeks post procedure.

CONCLUSION

The belief that ketamine, in the doses used for ED PPS, causes frequent emergence delirium is flawed. A pleasant emergence phenomenon is common, but is not distressing for the child, and has no long-term (up to 30 days) negative sequelae. Rarely, there is anxiety or distress on awakening from ketamine sedation, which settles spontaneously. This should not deter emergency physicians from using ketamine for PPS.

Adverse events and behavioral reactions related to ketamine based anesthesia for anorectal manometry in children

BACKGROUND

Pediatric patients undergoing anorectal manometry require ketamine anesthesia as other anesthetic agents affect the anorectal sphincter tone. The aim of this prospective observational audit was to evaluate our practice and report the occurrence of adverse events and behavioral reactions related to the use of ketamine, propofol, and midazolam combinations.

METHODS

Eighty-two consecutive pediatric patients (mean age 8.06 +/- 3.43 years) undergoing anorectal manometry were audited over a 1-year period. After a routine ketamine anesthetic some children were administered midazolam 0.1 mg.kg(-1), at the discretion of the attending anesthetist. Children requiring anal stretch following manometry studies also received propofol 3-5 mg.kg(-1). Intra- and postoperative adverse events, times to spontaneous awakening and discharge from the PACU were noted. Postoperative behavioral reactions were noted in the PACU and at follow-up interviews on the first postoperative day and after a period of 1 month.

RESULTS

Following completion of the audit, all patients fell into one of the four groups depending on the anesthetic agents they received: K (ketamine only, n = 16), KM (ketamine and midazolam, n = 10), KP (ketamine and propofol, n = 27), and KPM (ketamine, propofol, and midazolam, n = 29). There was no difference in the occurrence of behavioral reactions between the four groups at the three stages of follow-up. Overall, five patients reported 'new onset' nightmares that had resolved completely at the 3-month follow-up. The time to spontaneous awakening was shorter for K group (17.8 min +/- 20.2) vs KPM group (61.7 min +/- 24.4; P < 0.001). The times to discharge in minutes was also shorter in the K group (54.5 min, IQR 30-75 vs 90 min IQR 78-120; P < 0.001). Administration of propofol appeared to have an antiemetic effect [odds ratio (OR) 0.1, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.02-0.58, P < 0.009] in the recovery unit.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings suggest that, besides significantly prolonging time to spontaneous awakening and PACU discharge, neither the use of midazolam, propofol, or combinations is beneficial in preventing the occurrence of behavioral reactions following ketamine anesthesia. Behavioral reactions were common but did not appear to be long-term. Drug combinations with ketamine may have other benefits such as antiemesis.

Is intravenous conscious sedation for surgical orthodontics in children a viable alternative to general anaesthesia? – a case review

AIM

The aim of this case review was to describe the use of local anaesthesia (LA) and intravenous conscious sedation (IVCS) as a safe and effective means of managing patients requiring surgical orthodontic procedures as an alternative to general anaesthesia (GA) in children between the age of 11 and 15 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

1) Whether treatment was completed, partially completed or not completed; 2) assessment of physiological parameters to verify safety profile of the technique.

METHODS

Records were reviewed retrospectively for all patients included in the series undergoing planned surgical orthodontic procedures between January 2001 and January 2004 under IVCS. All patients had been pre-assessed and deemed to be of sufficient mental and physical maturity to be treated with IVCS. Written informed consent was gained from patients and their parents/guardians with full discussion of the alternative pain and anxiety control methods available including GA. All cases were undertaken by experienced SAS grade surgeons assisted by two dental nurses holding the certificate in dental sedation nursing and their recovery was supervised by registered general nurses. Patients were clinically monitored throughout together with continuous pulse oximetry and intermittent recording of non invasive blood pressure and pulse at 10-15 minute intervals. Patients were reviewed post operatively and any complications or comments noted.

RESULTS

Over a three year period a total of 107 patients underwent surgical procedures to aid orthodontic treatment, 28 (26%) under IVCS and 79 (74%) under GA. Twenty-five out of 28 patients in the IVCS group successfully completed all of their planned treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this case series, IVCS would appear to offer a safe and effective alternative to GA for this group of patients providing they are selected and managed by an appropriately trained team in a suitable setting. Further prospective evidence is needed if IVCS is to be recommended for general dental treatment in patients under the age of 16 years.

Conscious Sedation Reduces Distress in Children Undergoing Voiding Cystourethrography and Does Not Interfere with the Diagnosis of Vesicoureteric Reflux: A Randomized Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

Voiding cystourethrography (VCU) is a distressing procedure for children. Conscious sedation using oral midazolam may reduce this distress, but its use may also alter the ability of the VCU to show vesicoureteric reflux (VUR). The objectives of our study were to assess the effectiveness of conscious sedation using oral midazolam when administered routinely in children undergoing VCU and to ensure that conscious sedation using oral midazolam does not alter the ability of VCU to show VUR.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Our study was a randomized double-blind controlled trial performed at a university teaching hospital; our study group consisted of children over the age of 1 year who been referred for their first VCU examination from July 2001 to July 2003. Participants were randomized to receive a placebo or midazolam syrup (0.5 mg/kg) before the examination. The primary outcome measures were the Groningen Distress Rating Scale (GDRS) and grading of VUR, as defined by the international grading system established by the International Reflux Study Group.

RESULTS

There were no serious adverse events. One hundred thirty-nine children were randomized in the study, and 117 underwent complete assessment. Eight who underwent VCU after the study day were included in a "complete case" intention-to-treat analysis. In the placebo group, 34 children (61%) experienced serious distress or severe distress (GDRS score, 3 or 4). In the midazolam group, 16 children (26%) experienced the same degree of distress. There was a significant difference between the GDRS scores (nonlinear mixed-model analysis, p < 0.001) of the two study groups. The number needed to treat to reduce serious or severe distress in one child was 2.9 (95% CI, 1.9-5.5). VUR was identified in 16% of all children. There was no difference in VUR grading between the groups (nonlinear mixed-model analysis, p = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

Routine use of oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) for conscious sedation of children undergoing VCU reduces distress and does not alter the ability of VCU to show VUR well enough to allow diagnosis.

Procedural sedation and analgesia in children

Procedural sedation and analgesia for children--the use of sedative, analgesic, or dissociative drugs to relieve anxiety and pain associated with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures--is now widely practised by a diverse group of specialists outside the operating theatre. We review the principles underlying safe and effective procedural sedation and analgesia and the spectrum of procedures for which it is currently done. We discuss the decision-making process used to determine appropriate drug selection, dosing, and sedation endpoint. We detail the pharmacopoeia for procedural sedation and analgesia, reviewing the pharmacology and adverse effects of these drugs. International differences in practice are described along with current areas of controversy and future directions.

A study to assess the validity of clinical judgement in determining paediatric dental anxiety and related outcomes of management

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to determine the validity of subjective anxiety assessment and the outcomes of management of children receiving operative dental treatment.

SETTING

The study was conducted at the Departments of Sedation and Child Dental Health, Newcastle Dental Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

One hundred children and adolescents aged between 8 and 15 years participated in the study. Clinicians subjectively allocated 50 children for treatment with local analgesia alone (low anxiety), and identified 50 children who had the potential to benefit from nitrous oxide and oxygen sedation (high anxiety). Participants then completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC), the Venham Picture Test (VPT) and the Child Fear Survey Schedule-Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS). A global rating scale classified behaviour during dental treatment.

RESULTS

State anxiety and dental fear prior to treatment were significantly higher in children allocated to receive inhalation sedation (P = 0.004 and P = 0.005, respectively). There was no significant difference in trait anxiety or post-treatment state anxiety between the two groups (P = 0.69 and P = 0.06, respectively). Only 11% displayed 'negative' behaviour during treatment: 82% of this group represented those allocated to receive sedation.

CONCLUSION

Children receiving inhalation sedation were significantly more anxious prior to treatment than children receiving treatment with local analgesia alone. The findings support the subjective assessment of anxiety in children; however, objective anxiety measures may assist clinicians in identifying specific fears, which may ultimately aid patient management.

Procedural sedation for children with special health care needs

Children with special health care needs represent a growing percentage of pediatric patients treated in all emergency departments. Substantial literature exists concerning the medical treatment of these patients, but there is little written describing the management of procedural sedation or analgesia in this population. This article examines the unique anatomic and physiologic implications of procedural sedation or analgesia management in children with special health care needs.

Midazolam syrup as a premedication to reduce the discomfort associated with pediatric intravenous catheter insertion

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated midazolam syrup for reducing discomfort from intravenous placement in children 9 months to 6 years. Parents and observers rated the child's discomfort by using visual analogue scales. Median parents' pain scores were significantly lower in the midazolam than the placebo group (P =.002). Midazolam effectively reduces discomfort associated with intravenous insertion.

A randomized, clinical trial of oral midazolam plus placebo versus oral midazolam plus oral transmucosal fentanyl for sedation during laceration repair

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a combination of oral transmucosal fentanyl (Fentanyl Oralet, Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, IL) plus oral midazolam has an acceptable safety profile and is more effective than oral midazolam alone for sedation during laceration repair in a pediatric emergency department (ED).

METHODS

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Patients between 2 and 8 years of age who weighed >10 kg and presented to the ED with a laceration in need of repair under sedation were eligible for inclusion. All patients received oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg; maximum dose 10 mg) and either fentanyl (5-10 microg/kg) or placebo in oralet form. Data collected every 5 minutes included the following: heart rate, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, pain as measured on a Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Score (CHEOPS) scale (range: 4-13), and an activity scale (range: 1-5). Effectiveness of sedation was measured by CHEOPS and activity scores compared between the treatment groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were randomized to receive oral midazolam plus fentanyl (N = 28) or oral midazolam plus placebo (N = 23). Age, weight, gender, or baseline pain and activity scores did not differ between the 2 groups. Seven patients in the fentanyl group vomited compared with 0 patients in the placebo group. Three patients in the fentanyl group and no patients in the placebo group had brief oxygen saturation below 93% on room air. The mean pain score within 5 minutes of the start of the procedure did not differ between the 2 groups (fentanyl group, 9.4 versus placebo group, 8.8). Mean activity scores within 5 minutes of the start of the procedure were also similar (fentanyl group, 4.3 versus placebo group, 4.3).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of oral transmucosal fentanyl to oral midazolam did not improve pain or activity scores in pediatric patients given sedation for laceration repair. Patients who received Fentanyl Oralet suffered significantly more side effects despite the relatively low doses administered in this study. Oral transmucosal fentanyl should not be used for procedural sedation in the ED.

Sedation of children for electroencephalograms

OBJECTIVE

Sedation sometimes is necessary to perform an electroencephalogram (EEG) on a child. A dramatic decline in the need to use conscious sedation in our EEG laboratory prompted this review of our sedation experience. The purpose of this review was to determine the incidence of adverse sedation effects and to determine why the need for sedation had declined.

METHODS

All 513 attempts to administer sedation to children who were undergoing EEG studies during a 4-year period were reviewed retrospectively. Parameters studied included type and amount of the sedative agents, need for repeated dosing, successful completion of the EEG, and complications attributed to the sedative.

RESULTS

Sedation was attempted in 513 (18%) of 2855 EEGs performed during the 4-year period. Ninety-one percent of the EEGs performed with sedation were completed successfully. Chloral hydrate was the most frequently administered sedative. Complications (transient oxygen desaturation) occurred in 3 children, all of whom had recognized risk factors for airway compromise. The proportion of children who required sedation decreased from 32% to just 2% during that time period.

CONCLUSION

Sedation of children who are undergoing EEG examinations is effective and safe. Complications are infrequent. The need for sedation can be decreased greatly by adequate preparation and by creating a less-threatening, child-friendly environment in which to perform the study.

Anxiolysis with oral midazolam in pediatric patients undergoing dermatologic surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

Pediatric patients undergoing dermatologic surgical procedures often experience high levels of anxiety. Oral midazolam is a short-acting benzodiazepine that can ameliorate procedure-related anxiety.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to determine the safety and efficacy of oral midazolam as an adjuvant anxiolytic agent for pediatric patients undergoing dermatologic surgical procedures.

METHODS

A prospective series of pediatric patients undergoing dermatologic surgical procedures who received oral midazolam were monitored, and efficacy and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Oral midazolam provided good to excellent anxiolytic effects in most pediatric patients undergoing painful dermatologic surgical procedures. Because midazolam does not provide analgesic effects, local anesthesia is necessary. Complications were uncommon and minor.

CONCLUSION

Oral midazolam is an effective anxiolytic agent in pediatric patients undergoing dermatologic surgical procedures.

Flumazenil's Reversal of Myoclonic-like Movements Associated with Midazolam in Term Newborns

Sedation is an important aspect of care for critically ill newborns. Proper sedation reduces stress during procedures such as mechanical ventilation. Midazolam, a short-acting benzodiazepine, is widely administered as a sedative in newborn intensive care units but is not without side effects. Three term newborns developed myoclonic-like abnormal movements after receiving midazolam. In one, flumazenil controlled the abnormal movements. Flumazenil is a potent benzodiazepine antagonist that competitively blocks the central effects of benzodiazepines. It can reverse the sedative effects of benzodiazepines occurring after diagnostic or therapeutic procedures or after benzodiazepine overdose. Flumazenil may be considered in cases of abnormal movements associated with midazolam. However, further studies are needed to provide guidelines for the administration of this drug in newborns.

A comparison of intramuscular ketamine with high dose intramuscular midazolam with and without intranasal flumazenil in children before suturing

OBJECTIVES

(a) To compare the use of high dose intramuscular midazolam with and without intranasal flumazenil in children after suturing. (b) To compare the use of high dose intramuscular midazolam with low dose intramuscular ketamine in children before suturing.

METHODS

87 children, aged between 1 and 7 years, presenting with simple wounds needing sedation, were studied. Children considered combative (n=47) were given ketamine (2.5 mg/kg intramuscularly). The remaining 40 children were given midazolam (0.4 mg/kg intramuscularly) with and without flumazenil (25 microg/kg, intranasally).

RESULTS

The median oxygen saturation was 97% in both midazolam groups. Flumazenil significantly reduced the amount of agitation during recovery (p=0.048) and also the time at which children were ready for discharge (median 55 versus 95 minutes, p value <0.001). After discharge both midazolam groups had an unsteady gait (75%) and there was no significant difference in the duration. As expected because of the deliberate selection of combative children into the ketamine group, the pre-sedation behaviour was slightly more disturbed compared with the midazolam group (p=0.10). However, the ketamine group was less agitated during local anaesthetic and suturing p<0.001.

CONCLUSION

Intramuscular midazolam (0.4 mg/kg) did not effectively sedate the children, in that a significant number still had to be restrained. However, none could remember the suturing. Intranasal flumazenil seems to be effective in shortening the time to discharge. If midazolam is to be used then a dose high enough to produce full amnesia should be used, there seems to be no advantage in increasing the dose further. Low dose intramuscular ketamine remains the drug of choice.

Sedation for children requiring wound repair: a randomised controlled double blind comparison of oral midazolam and oral ketamine

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of oral ketamine (10 mg/kg) with oral midazolam (0.7 mg/kg) in providing sedation for suturing of lacerations.

METHOD

Prospective, randomised, double blinded trial with consecutive, concealed recruitment of 59 children aged 1 to 7 with wounds requiring local anaesthetic (LA) injection or topical LA with an anxiety score greater than one.

RESULTS

Tolerance to LA injection was better with ketamine (p=0.029) and tolerance to procedure after LA injection showed a trend towards being improved with ketamine (p=0.067). There was no difference in tolerance to LA application or procedure in children receiving topical LA. Time to reach a sedation score of less than four was faster with ketamine (medians 20 versus 43 minutes, p=0.001) but times from dosing to discharge (medians 105 and 110 minutes) were similar. Inconsolable agitation was reported with midazolam in six cases. Dysphoria was not noted with ketamine. Vomiting was more common with ketamine but not significantly so (six versus two, p = 0.14). Oxygen desaturations were noted in both groups. Ataxia after discharge was seen in four patients, two in each group. Thirty six per cent of children showed new behavioural disturbances in the two weeks after discharge, more commonly in the midazolam group (p=0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

At these doses tolerance to LA injection was better in children receiving ketamine, with fewer behavioural changes noted in the first two weeks. Midazolam at this dose caused dysphoric reactions, which may have affected the results. Continuous pulse oximetry monitoring is required when using these drugs. Vomiting and prolonged ataxia occurred in a few patients.

Does adjunctive midazolam reduce recovery agitation after ketamine sedation for pediatric procedures? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Despite widespread use of adjunctive benzodiazepines during ketamine sedation, their efficacy in reducing recovery agitation in children has never been studied. We wished to characterize the nature and severity of recovery agitation after ketamine sedation in children treated in the emergency department and to determine whether the addition of adjunctive midazolam reduces the magnitude of such recovery agitation.

METHODS

The study was a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial of adjunctive midazolam versus placebo during ketamine sedation. We enrolled 104 children aged 12 months to 15 years (median age, 6 years) at a combined university medical center and children's hospital. Subjects received either intravenous midazolam (0.05 mg/kg up to 2 mg) or placebo after intravenous administration of a ketamine loading dose (1.5 mg/kg). Treating physicians and nurses independently noted the presence of crying, hallucinations, and nightmares during recovery and graded recovery agitation by using a 100-mm visual analog scale. Preprocedure agitation and external stimulation during recovery were also graded. The time from ketamine injection until each subject met the recovery criteria was recorded.

RESULTS

Fifty-three subjects received midazolam, and 51 received placebo. Potentially confounding variables were similar between the groups. Sedation efficacy, adverse effects, and recovery time were also similar between groups. Interobserver agreement between physician and nurse assessments was substantial. Median physician assessment of recovery agitation was 4 mm (interquartile range, 2 to 19) in the midazolam group and 5 mm (interquartile range, 3 to 14) in the placebo group (difference -1; 95% confidence interval -3 to 2; P =.705). Recovery agitation was moderately correlated with preprocedure agitation (rho=0.486) but not with external stimulation during recovery (rho=0.147).

CONCLUSION

Recovery agitation is common but generally of very low magnitude after ketamine sedation in children in the ED. We observed a median physician rating of 5 mm on a 100-mm visual analog scale, a score that we believe to be clinically insignificant. The degree of recovery agitation after ketamine sedation is significantly related to the degree of preprocedure agitation. In this study, concurrent midazolam did not diminish such agitation and had no measurably beneficial effect. Use of adjunctive benzodiazepines in pediatric ketamine sedation appears unnecessary.

Anesthesia outside the operating room for emergency procedures

Non-anesthetists usually provide sedation and anesthesia outside the operating room for emergency procedures. Techniques vary from no sedation to deep sedation using drugs with a good safety profile and few side effects. Newer methods of airway control may allow volatile agents such as sevoflurane to be used. Anesthetists may need to join sedation teams if they are to maintain control of their specialty.