Parental presence plus oral midazolam decreases frequency of 5% halothane inductions in children

The efficacy of benzodiazepines as acute anxiolytics in children: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Current practice guidelines do not recommend benzodiazepines for acute management of anxiety disorders in pediatric patients. However, in procedural settings, benzodiazepines are commonly used to relieve acute preprocedural stress. This meta-analysis examines the efficacy and tolerability of benzodiazepines as short-term anxiolytics in children.

METHOD

PubMed was searched for randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of benzodiazepines as short-term anxiolytics in pediatric patients. Twenty-one trials involving 1,416 participants were included. A fixed effects model was used to examine the standardized mean difference of improvement in anxiety levels compared to control conditions. In stratified subgroup and meta-regression, the effect of the specific agent, dose, timing, and setting of benzodiazepine treatment was examined.

RESULTS

A significant benefit was seen for benzodiazepines compared to control (standardized mean difference = 0.71 [95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.82], k = 24, z = 12.7, P < .001). There was also funnel plot asymmetry in this meta-analysis, suggesting some evidence of publication bias. Moderator analyses found that when benzodiazepines were used in dental or nonoperating room procedures, they were more effective than when they were used in operating room procedures (test for subgroup differences Q₂ = 6.34, P = .04). Tolerability analysis revealed there was no significant difference in the risk of developing irritability or behavioral changes between benzodiazepine and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Benzodiazepines are effective and well-tolerated when used as short-term anxiolytics in procedural settings for pediatric patients. Further research is needed to determine whether benzodiazepines are effective in pediatric anxiety disorders.

Non-pharmacological interventions for assisting the induction of anaesthesia in children

BACKGROUND

Induction of general anaesthesia can be distressing for children. Non-pharmacological methods for reducing anxiety and improving co-operation may avoid the adverse effects of preoperative sedation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in assisting induction of anaesthesia in children by reducing their anxiety, distress or increasing their co-operation.

SEARCH METHODS

In this updated review we searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12) and searched the following databases from inception to 15 January 2013: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science. We reran the search in August 2014. We will deal with the single study found to be of interest when we next update the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of a non-pharmacological intervention implemented on the day of surgery or anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 trials (2681 children) investigating 17 interventions of interest; all trials were conducted in high-income countries. Overall we judged the trials to be at high risk of bias. Except for parental acupuncture (graded low), all other GRADE assessments of the primary outcomes of comparisons were very low, indicating a high degree of uncertainty about the overall findings. Parental presence: In five trials (557 children), parental presence at induction of anaesthesia did not reduce child anxiety compared with not having a parent present (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.14 to 0.20). In a further three trials (267 children) where we were unable to pool results, we found no clear differences in child anxiety, whether a parent was present or not. In a single trial, child anxiety showed no significant difference whether one or two parents were present, although parental anxiety was significantly reduced when both parents were present at the induction. Parental presence was significantly less effective than sedative premedication in reducing children's anxiety at induction in three trials with 254 children (we could not pool results). Child interventions (passive): When a video of the child's choice was played during induction, children were significantly less anxious than controls (median difference modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (mYPAS) 31.2, 95% CI 27.1 to 33.3) in a trial of 91 children. In another trial of 120 children, co-operation at induction did not differ significantly when a video fairytale was played before induction. Children exposed to low sensory stimulation were significantly less anxious than control children on introduction of the anaesthesia mask and more likely to be co-operative during induction in one trial of 70 children. Music therapy did not show a significant effect on children's anxiety in another trial of 51 children. Child interventions (mask introduction): We found no significant differences between a mask exposure intervention and control in a single trial of 103 children for child anxiety (risk ratio (RR) 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.11) although children did demonstrate significantly better co-operation in the mask exposure group (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.51). Child interventions (interactive): In a three-arm trial of 168 children, preparation with interactive computer packages (in addition to parental presence) was more effective than verbal preparation, although differences between computer and cartoon preparation were not significant, and neither was cartoon preparation when compared with verbal preparation. Children given video games before induction were significantly less anxious at induction than those in the control group (mYPAS mean difference (MD) -9.80, 95% CI -19.42 to -0.18) and also when compared with children who were sedated with midazolam (mYPAS MD -12.20, 95% CI -21.82 to -2.58) in a trial of 112 children. When compared with parental presence only, clowns or clown doctors significantly lessened children's anxiety in the operating/induction room (mYPAS MD -24.41, 95% CI -38.43 to -10.48; random-effects, I² 75%) in three trials with a total of 133 children. However, we saw no significant differences in child anxiety in the operating room between clowns/clown doctors and sedative premedication (mYPAS MD -9.67, 95% CI -21.14 to 1.80, random-effects, I² 66%; 2 trials of 93 children). In a trial of hypnotherapy versus sedative premedication in 50 children, there were no significant differences in children's anxiety at induction (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.04). Parental interventions: Children of parents having acupuncture compared with parental sham acupuncture were less anxious during induction (mYPAS MD -17, 95% CI -30.51 to -3.49) and were more co-operative (RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.53) in a single trial of 67 children. Two trials with 191 parents assessed the effects of parental video viewing but did not report any of the review's prespecified primary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that the presence of parents during induction of general anaesthesia does not diminish their child's anxiety. Potentially promising non-pharmacological interventions such as parental acupuncture; clowns/clown doctors; playing videos of the child's choice during induction; low sensory stimulation; and hand-held video games need further investigation in larger studies.

Preoperative anxiety management, emergence delirium, and postoperative behavior

Preoperative anxiolysis is important for children scheduled for surgery. The nature of the anxiety depends on several factors, including age, temperament, past hospitalizations, and socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds. A panoply of interventions effect anxiolysis, including parental presence, distraction, and premedication, although no single strategy is effective for all ages. Emergence delirium (ED) occurs after the use of sevoflurane and desflurane in preschool-aged children in the recovery room. Symptoms usually last approximately 15 minutes and resolve spontaneously. The Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium scale is used to diagnose ED and evaluate therapeutic interventions for ED such as propofol and opioids.

Family-centred care for hospitalised children aged 0-12 years

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the Cochrane systematic review of family-centred care published in 2007 (Shields 2007). Family-centred care (FCC) is a widely used model in paediatrics, is thought to be the best way to provide care to children in hospital and is ubiquitous as a way of delivering care. When a child is admitted, the whole family is affected. In giving care, nurses, doctors and others must consider the impact of the child's admission on all family members. However, the effectiveness of family-centred care as a model of care has not been measured systematically.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of family-centred models of care for hospitalised children aged from birth (unlike the previous version of the review, this update excludes premature neonates) to 12 years, when compared to standard models of care, on child, family and health service outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

In the original review, we searched up until 2004. For this update, we searched: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL,The Cochrane Library, Issue 12 2011); MEDLINE (Ovid SP); EMBASE (Ovid SP); PsycINFO (Ovid SP); CINAHL (EBSCO Host); and Sociological Abstracts (CSA). We did not search three that were included in the original review: Social Work Abstracts, the Australian Medical Index and ERIC. We searched EMBASE in this update only and searched from 2004 onwards. There was no limitation by language. We performed literature searches in May and June 2009 and updated them again in December 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including cluster randomised trials in which family-centred care models are compared with standard models of care for hospitalised children (0 to 12 years, but excluding premature neonates). Studies had to meet criteria for family-centredness. In order to assess the degree of family-centredness, we used a modified rating scale based on a validated instrument, (same instrument used in the initial review), however, we decreased the family-centredness score for inclusion from 80% to 50% in this update. We also changed several other selection criteria in this update: eligible study designs are now limited to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only; single interventions not reflecting a FCC model of care have been excluded; and the selection criterion whereby studies with inadequate or unclear blinding of outcome assessment were excluded from the review has been removed.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors undertook searches, and four authors independently assessed studies against the review criteria, while two were assigned to extract data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies found since 2004 were originally viewed as possible inclusions, but when the family-centred score assessment was tested, only one met the minimum score of family-centredness and was included in this review. This was an unpublished RCT involving 288 children post-tonsillectomy in a care-by-parent unit (CBPU) compared with standard inpatient care.The study used a range of behavioural, economic and physical measures. It showed that children in the CBPU were significantly less likely to receive inadequate care compared with standard inpatient admission, and there were no significant differences for their behavioural outcomes or other physical outcomes. Parents were significantly more satisfied with CBPU care than standard care, assessed both before discharge and at 7 days after discharge. Costs were lower for CPBU care compared with standard inpatient care. No other outcomes were reported. The study was rated as being at low to unclear risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update of a review has found limited, moderate-quality evidence that suggests some benefit of a family-centred care intervention for children's clinical care, parental satisfaction, and costs, but this is based on a small dataset and needs confirmation in larger RCTs. There is no evidence of harms. Overall, there continues to be little high-quality quantitative research available about the effects of family-centred care. Further rigorous research on the use of family-centred care as a model for care delivery to children and families in hospitals is needed. This research should implement well-developed family-centred care interventions, ideally in randomised trials. It should investigate diverse participant groups and clinical settings, and should assess a wide range of outcomes for children, parents, staff and health services.

Evidence-based clinical update: does premedication with oral midazolam lead to improved behavioural outcomes in children?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this evidence-based clinical update was to identify the best evidence to determine if behavioural outcomes are improved in children after oral midazolam premedication.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using both PubMed and OVID programs, utilizing the terms "midazolam", and either "premedication" or "preoperative treatment". Search limits that were employed included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), English language, human studies, children aged 0-18 yr, and publication dates 1990 - present (January 2006). A review of the 171 abstracts obtained was undertaken and, of these, 30 papers were identified that concerned oral midazolam in children prior to general anesthesia, and that involved a RCT with a placebo or control arm. These studies were assigned levels of evidence, and grades of recommendation were made according to Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria.

RESULTS

Oral midazolam premedication in children was found to reduce the anxiety associated with separation from parents/guardians, and with induction of anesthesia. Recovery times are not significantly delayed. There is no consistent evidence to suggest a reduction in the phenomenon of emergence agitation. Evidence suggesting an improvement in behavioural outcomes at home is also inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Premedication with midazolam 0.5 mg x kg(-1) po administered 20-30 min preoperatively, is effective in reducing both separation and induction anxiety in children (grade A recommendation), with minimal effect on recovery times. However improved postoperative behavioural outcomes in the postanesthesia care unit, or at home cannot be predicted on a consistent basis.

Non-pharmacological interventions for assisting the induction of anaesthesia in children

BACKGROUND

Induction of general anaesthesia can be distressing for children. Non-pharmacological methods for reducing anxiety and improving co-operation may avoid the adverse effects of preoperative sedation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in assisting induction of anaesthesia in children by reducing their anxiety, distress or increasing their co-operation.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 1). We searched the following databases from inception to 14th December 2008: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS, Web of Science and EMBASE.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of a non-pharmacological intervention implemented on the day of surgery or anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 trials, all from developed countries, involving 1796 children, their parents or both. Eight trials assessed parental presence. None showed significant differences in anxiety or co-operation of children during induction, except for one where parental presence was significantly less effective than midazolam in reducing children's anxiety at induction. Six trials assessed interventions for children. Preparation with a computer package improved co-operation compared with parental presence (one trial). Children playing hand-held video games before induction were significantly less anxious than controls or premedicated children (one trial). Compared with controls, clown doctors reduced anxiety in children (modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (mYPAS): mean difference (MD) 30.75 95% CI 15.14 to 46.36; one trial). In children undergoing hypnosis, there was a nonsignificant trend towards reduced anxiety during induction (mYPAS < 24: risk ratio (RR) 0.59 95% CI 0.33 to 1.04 - 39% versus 68%: one trial) compared with midazolam. A low sensory environment improved children's co-operation at induction (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.95; one trial) and no effect on children's anxiety was found for music therapy (one trial).Parental interventions were assessed in three trials. Children of parents having acupuncture compared with parental sham-acupuncture were less anxious during induction (mYPAS MD 17, 95% CI 3.49 to 30.51) and more children were co-operative (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.99). Parental anxiety was also significantly reduced in this trial. In two trials, a video viewed preoperatively did not show effects on child or parental outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that the presence of parents during induction of general anaesthesia does not reduce their child's anxiety. Promising non-pharmacological interventions such as parental acupuncture; clown doctors; hypnotherapy; low sensory stimulation; and hand-held video games needs to be investigated further.

Family-centred care for children in hospital

BACKGROUND

Family-centred care (FCC) is a widely used model in paediatrics, and is felt instinctively to be the best way to provide care to children in hospital. However, its effectiveness has not been measured.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to assess the effects of family-centred models of care for hospitalised children when compared to standard or professionally-centred models of care, on child, family and health service outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched: MEDLINE (1966 to February 2004); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004); CINAHL (1982 to February 2004); PsycINFO (1972 to February 2004); ERIC (1982 to February 2004); Sociological Abstracts (1963 to February 2004); Social Work Abstracts (1977 to February 2004); and AMI (Australasian Medical Index) (1966 to February 2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials including cluster randomised trials and controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and controlled before and after studies (CBAs), in which family-centred care models are compared with professionally-centred models of care for hospitalised children (aged up to 12 years). Studies also had to meet criteria for family-centredness and methodological quality. In order to assess studies for the degree of family-centredness, this review utilised a modified rating scale based on a validated instrument.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors undertook the searches, and three authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies met inclusion criteria, and hence no analysis could be undertaken. Five studies came close to inclusion. Three of these studies were excluded primarily because of inadequate or unclear blinding of outcome assessment, while for one study the age group was outside the parameters of this review. One study met most criteria, but the children were aged up to 18 years. We contacted the study authors who kindly provided a subset analysis, but on further examination the study also proved to have inadequate blinding procedures and so was not included. It was not possible to undertake any subset analysis of populations. Of the other studies identified through the search, 13 met some of the inclusion criteria but were reports of qualitative research and are reviewed elsewhere.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review has highlighted the dearth of high quality quantitative research about family-centred care. A much more stringent examination of the use of family-centred care as a model for care delivery to children and families in health services is needed.

Risk factors for anxiety at induction of anesthesia in children: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In children anxiety at induction of anesthesia is a common and important aspect of the psychological impact of anesthesia and surgery. Previous studies examining risk factors for increased anxiety have found contradictory results. This may be due to using small, or highly selective population samples, or failure to adjust for confounding variables. Results may also be culturally or institutionally specific. The aim of this study was to identify possible risk factors in a large representative cohort of children.

METHODS

One thousand two hundred fifty children aged 3-12 years were recruited. Anxiety at induction of anesthesia was assessed using the modified Yale preoperative anxiety scale. Children with an anxiety score of greater than 30 were classified as having high anxiety. Anesthetists were blinded to the assessment. Data recorded included age, gender, past healthcare history, family details, use of sedative premedication, anesthesia details, admission details, parental anxiety and child temperament. An unadjusted analysis was performed to identify possible risk factors for high anxiety. An adjusted regression analysis was then performed including the potential risk factors identified in the unadjusted analysis.

RESULTS

The incidence of high anxiety at induction was 50.2%. In the adjusted analysis, younger age, behavioral problems with previous healthcare attendances, longer duration of procedure, having more than five previous hospital admissions and anxious parents at induction were all associated with high anxiety at induction. Hospital admission via the day stay ward was associated with less anxiety. Sedative premedication was associated with less anxiety in children with ASA status greater than one. However, the variability explained by factors included in the model was low (5.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Some simple preoperative questions can help identify children at risk of heightened anxiety at induction of anesthesia; however, it remains difficult to precisely predict which child will experience high anxiety.

Oral premedication with fentanyl may be a safe and effective alternative to oral midazolam

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Although midazolam is commonly given orally to infants and small children for premedication, the taste is sometimes unacceptable even when mixed with syrup. We tested the efficacy and safety of oral fentanyl compared with oral midazolam in a randomized open-label study.

METHODS

Fifty-one children, aged 12-107 months and weighing 10-25 kg, were randomly assigned to fentanyl or midazolam treatment groups. Midazolam (5 mg) or fentanyl (0.1 mg) was given orally from a small bottle with a small orifice 30 min before transfer to the preoperative holding room. The excitation-sedation conditions of the patients were assessed before and after general anaesthesia.

RESULTS

The preoperative scores did not differ significantly between the two groups. No major complications were observed in either group. Postoperative vomiting occurred in 5 of 27 (18.5%) patients treated with oral fentanyl and in none of 24 of those treated with midazolam.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral administration of fentanyl 30 min before entrance to the holding room for an operation from a bottle with a small orifice is a premedication option for children between 1 and 8 yr of age.

Oral midazolam premedication for day case breast surgery, a randomised prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study

We conducted a randomised prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy of oral midazolam premedication in 50 ASA I and II female patients scheduled to undergo day case breast surgery. Anxiety was assessed using 100-mm visual analogue scales (VAS) and The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) psychometric questionnaire. Midazolam premedication did not significantly reduce either VAS or STAI score, although heart rate and systolic arterial pressure immediately before induction of anaesthesia were significantly lower in patients who received midazolam (p = 0.006 and 0.039, respectively). Induction of anaesthesia was achieved with a lower dose of propofol (p = 0.0009) and excellent (Grade I) conditions for insertion of a laryngeal mask airway were achieved more often after midazolam premedication (p = 0.038). Arterial desaturation during induction of anaesthesia and insertion of a laryngeal mask airway occurred more often in patients who received placebo (p = 0.022). There was a good correlation between VAS and STAI used to assess the anxiolytic effects of premedication. (Spearman coefficient 0.58, p < 0.0001).

Parents' preferences for participation in decisions made regarding their child's anaesthetic care

BACKGROUND

The traditional paternalistic approach to medical decision-making is moving towards a climate of greater patient and/or surrogate involvement. Despite this, there is considerable debate regarding patient preferences for participation in medical decision-making and its effect on patient satisfaction and outcome. This study was designed to examine parents' preferences for participation in decisions regarding their child's anaesthetic care and to determine if active participation is associated with greater parental satisfaction.

METHODS

Three hundred and eight parents of children scheduled to undergo elective surgical procedures were asked to complete a questionnaire detailing information regarding their preferences for participation in decisions made regarding their child's anaesthetic care. Parents were classified as being passive, shared, or active decision makers.

RESULTS

Overall, parents evidenced a preference for shared decision-making with the anaesthetist. Parents preferred to be passive with respect to intraoperative pain management but active with respect to their presence when their child wakes up. There were no differences between active, shared and passive decision-makers with respect to their satisfaction with anaesthetic care and their participation in decision-making. However, 32.1% of parents stated that they would have preferred more involvement in decision-making. These parents were significantly less satisfied with their child's care than those who felt that their participation had been adequate.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights specific areas in which parents would prefer a more active role in decision-making and, as such, may serve to focus anaesthetists' efforts to educate parents with respect to the various options available for their child's care.

Parental presence during anaesthesia induction for outpatient surgery of the infant

We conducted a randomized controlled trial of parental presence during anaesthesia induction for outpatient surgery in 73 infants (aged 1-12 months). Effects of parental presence on infant and parental outcomes, including anxiety, health care attitudes and satisfaction with the anaesthesia and surgery experience were evaluated. Results demonstrated that parental presence had no impact on infant behavioural distress during induction. In addition, parents who were present demonstrated comparable anxiety levels and health care attitudes before and after surgery, as well as comparable levels of satisfaction with the surgical experience compared to parents who were absent during induction. We discuss reasons for the lack of treatment effects from parental presence, and new directions for future research to identify subgroups of children who may most benefit from the opportunity to have parents involved in the perioperative period.

Separation and induction behaviors in children: are parents good predictors?

In busy surgical outpatient settings, it is important to quickly yet thoroughly assess a child's preoperative needs to determine whether a premedication or perhaps a parent's presence is warranted to facilitate a smooth anesthetic induction. This observational study of 252 children evaluated factors related to separation and induction behaviors of children. Six percent of children had difficulty separating from their parents, and 22% were uncooperative with induction of general anesthesia via face mask. Logistic regression showed that parent prediction was the best indicator of separation behavior, whereas younger age and separation behavior were both predictive of induction behavior. Findings suggest that parents are good predictors of their child's preoperative behaviors and may, therefore, provide valuable input when perioperative nurses and anesthesiologists are making decisions about potential preoperative interventions.