comparison of oral midazolam and promethazine with oral midazolam alone for sedating children during computed tomography

نویسندگان

hassan barzegari

behzad zohrevandi department of emergency medicine, ahvaz jundishapur university of medical sciences, ahvaz, iran

kambiz masoumi department of emergency medicine, ahvaz jundishapur university of medical sciences, ahvaz, iran

arash forouzan department of emergency medicine, ahvaz jundishapur university of medical sciences, ahvaz, iran

چکیده

introduction: both midazolam and promethazine are recommended to be used as sedatives in many studies but each have some side effects that limits their use. combination therapy as an alternative method, may decreases these limitations. therefore, this study aimed to compare midazolam with midazolam-promethazine regarding induction, maintenance, and recovery characteristics following pediatric procedural sedation and analgesia. methods: children under 7 years old who needed sedation for being ct scanned were included in this double-blind randomized clinical trial. the patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: one only received midazolam (0.5 mg/kg), while the other group received a combination of midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) and promethazine (1.25 mg/kg). university of michigan sedation scale (umss) was used to assess sedation induction. in addition to demographic data, the child’s vital signs were evaluated before prescribing the drugs and after inducing sedation (reaching umss level 2). the primary outcomes in the present study were onset of action after administration and duration of the drugs’ effect. results: 107 patients were included in the study. mean onset of action was 55.4±20.3 minutes for midazolam and 32.5±11.1 minutes for midazolam-promethazine combination (p<0.001). but duration of effect was not different between the 2 groups (p=0.36). 8 (7.5%) patients were unresponsive to the medication, all 8 of which were in the midazolam treated group (p=0.006). also in 18 (16.8%) cases a rescue dose was prescribed, 14 (25.9%) were in the midazolam group and 4 (7.5%) were in the midazolam-promethazine group (p=0.02). comparing systolic (p=0.20) and diastolic (p=0.34) blood pressure, heart rate (p=0.16), respiratory rate (p=0.17) and arterial oxygen saturation level (p=0.91) showed no significant difference between the 2 groups after intervention. conclusion: based on the findings of this study, it seems that using a combination of midazolam and promethazine not only speeds up the sedation induction, but also decreases unresponsiveness to the treatment and the need for a rescue dose.

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Comparison of Oral Midazolam and Promethazine with Oral Midazolam alone for Sedating Children during Computed Tomography

INTRODUCTION Both midazolam and promethazine are recommended to be used as sedatives in many studies but each have some side effects that limits their use. Combination therapy as an alternative method, may decreases these limitations. Therefore, this study aimed to compare midazolam with midazolam-promethazine regarding induction, maintenance, and recovery characteristics following pediatric pr...

متن کامل

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-m...

متن کامل

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-m...

متن کامل

Comparison of Oral Midazolam With Intravenous Midazolam for Sedation Children During Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

Upper endoscopy is a common procedure for the diagnosis and treatment of upper digestive tract diseases. The increasing number of pediatric gastrointestinal procedures has led to increasing attention on the safety and efficacy of medications used for sedation during the procedure. This randomized blinded interventional study was designed to compare the effect of oral midazolam with intravenous ...

متن کامل

comparison of oral midazolam with intravenous midazolam for sedation children during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

upper endoscopy is a common procedure for the diagnosis and treatment of upper digestive tract diseases. the increasing number of pediatric gastrointestinal procedures has led to increasing attention on the safety and efficacy of medications used for sedation during the procedure. this randomized blinded interventional study was designed to compare the effect of oral midazolam with intravenous ...

متن کامل

Comparison of oral and intra venous midazolam for sedation in children undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Background: Selecting the best medication for upper GI endoscopy in children is a challenging issue. The goal of this study was to compare the effects of oral and intravenous midazolam for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) on children. Methods: In this randomized clinical trial study conducted in Amirkola Children's Hospital, 110 children were randomly assigned to oral or intravenous g...

متن کامل

منابع من

با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید


عنوان ژورنال:
emergency journal

جلد ۳، شماره ۳، صفحات ۱۰۹-۱۱۳

میزبانی شده توسط پلتفرم ابری doprax.com

copyright © 2015-2023