Oral midazolam premedication for paediatric day case patients

The MAGIC trial: a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel, noninferiority, randomised trial of melatonin versus midazolam in the premedication of anxious children attending for elective surgery under general anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Child anxiety before general anaesthesia and surgery is common. Midazolam is a commonly used premedication to address this. Melatonin is an alternative anxiolytic, however trials evaluating its efficacy in children have delivered conflicting results.

METHODS

This multicentre, double-blind randomised trial was performed in 20 UK NHS Trusts. A sample size of 624 was required to declare noninferiority of melatonin. Anxious children, awaiting day case elective surgery under general anaesthesia, were randomly assigned 1:1 to midazolam or melatonin premedication (0.5 mg kg-1, maximum 20 mg) 30 min before transfer to the operating room. The primary outcome was the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale-Short Form (mYPAS-SF). Secondary outcomes included safety. Results are presented as n (%) and adjusted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped prematurely (n=110; 55 per group) because of recruitment futility. Participants had a median age of 7 (6-10) yr, and 57 (52%) were female. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale-Short Form analyses showed adjusted mean differences of 13.1 (3.7-22.4) and 12.9 (3.1-22.6), respectively, in favour of midazolam. The upper 95% confidence interval limits exceeded the predefined margin of 4.3 in both cases, whereas the lower 95% confidence interval excluded zero, indicating that melatonin was inferior to midazolam, with a difference considered to be clinically relevant. No serious adverse events were seen in either arm.

CONCLUSION

Melatonin was less effective than midazolam at reducing preoperative anxiety in children, although the early termination of the trial increases the likelihood of bias.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN18296119.

Parental Presence at Induction of Anesthesia to Reduce Anxiety: A Systematic Research and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Perioperative anxiety can significantly alter outcomes for pediatric patients. Parental presence at induction of anesthesia (PPIA) is one method of anxiety reduction, but the efficacy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine if PPIA affects child and caretaker perioperative anxiety levels.

DESIGN

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis METHODS: This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases was performed on June 29, 2021. Search terms were related to parental presence in the operating room, anesthesia or anesthesia induction, and pediatric patients. The literature search identified English-language studies comparing children receiving PPIA to controls or studies examining attitudes toward PPIA.

FINDINGS

A total of 21 articles (n = 9573) met inclusion criteria. Seven studies (n = 776) quantified child anxiety with validated scales, and seven studies quantified parent anxiety (n = 621). There was no significant difference in preoperative anxiety between PPIA and controls for patients (P = .27) or caretakers (P = .99). PPIA patients had 8.40 [0.16, 16.64] (P = .05) lower Modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale scores compared to control at induction, and parents had 3.41 [0.32, 6.50] (P = .03) lower State-Trait Anxiety Inventory State scores. Three studies concluded that PPIA did not increase operating room time or induction time. Twenty-three studies examined parental attitudes toward PPIA and found that 98.03% [96.09%, 99.32%] of parents present at induction would like to be present at subsequent surgeries. Contention in support for PPIA was seen amongst healthcare providers, but attitudes increasingly favored PPIA after implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

PPIA reduces parental and patient anxiety, may increase parental satisfaction, and may not impede operating room efficiency. PPIA should be considered as a valuable tool to improve surgical outcomes and patient and family satisfaction.

The Impact of Scripted Self-Hypnotic Relaxation on the Periprocedural Experience and Anesthesiologist Sedation Use in the Pediatric Cardiac Catheterization Suite: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

To assess the impact on children of self-hypnotic relaxation scripts read by trained staff prior to the induction of anesthesia and/or extubation on the periprocedural experience.

Patients and Methods

A total of 160 children aged 7–18 years undergoing a cardiac catheterization intervention under general anesthesia were randomized into 4 groups: (1) a pre-procedure (PP-script) read prior to entering the procedural room, (2) a script read prior to extubation (PX-Script), (3) both PP- and PX-Scripts read and (4) no script read. Anxiety and pain were rated on self-reported 0–10 scales. The modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale was used for preoperative anxiety. The effect of script reading was associated with outcomes by linear regression for continuous variables, and logistic regression for binary variables in two-sided tests at a significance level of 0.05. Results are given in odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Data were available for 158 patients. Reading the PP-Script prior to anesthesia was associated with a significant reduction in the use of intraoperative sedatives from 30% to 14% (OR 0.40; CI 0.18–0.88; p = 0.02) by the anesthesiologists, who were blinded to group attribution until extubation. This was despite the children not self-reporting significantly lower levels of anxiety or pain. The PX-Script did not change outcomes. Among groups, there was no significant difference in room time, postoperative recovery time and pain.

Conclusion

Reading a PP-Script for guidance in self-hypnotic relaxation can result in less need for intravenous sedation in the judgment of the anesthesiologist, independent of the children’s self-reported anxiety and pain. This raises interesting questions about subconscious patient–physician interactions affecting pain management.

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

NCT02347748.

Added Syrup as a Flavoring to Oral Midazolam Intravenous Solution Premedication Improves Tolerability in Pediatric Patients

Purpose

To investigate the tolerability of midazolam intravenous (IV) solution by masking its bitter taste through the addition of syrup.

Methods

In the waiting area before surgery at our institution, Eye and ENT Hospital, from May to November of 2021, pediatric patients scheduled for anterior ear fistula removal or eardrum catheterization were randomly assigned to receive a mixture of IV midazolam and water (Group C) or IV midazolam and syrup (Group S) in equal volumes. We measured the difference between the groups in terms of drug tolerability with a 5-point facial hedonic scale given to every patient, parent, and nurse involved in the study. Secondary outcomes included sedation and anxiety levels, which were assessed at separation from the parents and general anesthesia induction via a mask.

Results

In total, 180 patients were enrolled. The facial hedonic scales were higher in Group S as evaluated by the children (p=0.046), parents (p=0.020), and nurses (p=0.026). More patients were willing to take the same solution again in Group S than in Group C (p=0.024). The levels of sedation and anxiety at two timepoints were similar between the groups (all p>0.05). No adverse events were noted preoperatively.

Conclusion

The tolerability of IV midazolam administered orally was increased in a pediatric population by adding syrup. The sedative and anxiolytic effects were comparable for both midazolam mixtures.

Trial Registry Number

China Clinical Research Information Service, ChiCTR2000040229.

Melatonin for pre-medication in children: a systematic review

Background

Melatonin’s effectiveness as an anxiolytic medication has been confirmed in adults; however, its efficacy in a paediatric population is unclear. A number of small studies have assessed its use in children as a pre-operative anxiolytic, with conflicting results.

Methods

We undertook a systematic review of pre-operative melatonin use in children. Four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science), and ‘ClinicalTrials.gov’ were searched for ongoing and completed clinical trials of relevance. Citation tracking reference lists and relevant articles were also accessed. The review was unrestricted by comparator or outcomes. Eleven studies were judged eligible for inclusion. There were high levels of heterogeneity in melatonin administration (in terms of dose and timing). Variable outcomes were reported and included: anxiety; anaesthetic success; analgesia; sedation; post-operative recovery; and safety. Outcomes were not always assessed with the same measures.

Results

Evidence to support melatonin’s anxiolytic properties in this setting is conflicting. Melatonin was associated with reduced sedative effects, post-operative excitement and improved emergence behaviour, compared to comparator drugs. One study reported the benefit of melatonin use on sleep disturbance at two weeks post-surgery. No adverse safety events were identified to be significantly associated with melatonin, affirming its excellent safety profile.

Conclusion

Despite potential advantages, including improved emergence behaviour, based on current evidence we cannot confirm whether melatonin is non-inferior to current “usual care” pre-medications. Further consideration of melatonin as an anxiolytic pre-medication in paediatric surgery is needed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-022-03149-w.

Stakeholder perspectives on barriers and enablers to recruiting anxious children undergoing day surgery under general anaesthetic: a qualitative internal pilot study of the MAGIC randomised controlled trial

Background

The ‘Melatonin for Anxiety prior to General anaesthesia In Children’ (MAGIC) trial was designed to compare midazolam and melatonin as pre-medications for anxious children (aged five to fourteen), undergoing day-case surgical procedures under general anaesthesia. Low recruitment is a challenge for many trials, particularly paediatric trials and those in ‘emergency’ settings. A qualitative study as part of MAGIC aimed to gather stakeholder perspectives on barriers and enablers to recruitment.

Methods

Sixteen stakeholders from six sites participated in semi-structured interviews about their experiences of setting up the MAGIC trial and recruiting patients as part of the internal pilot. Data was analysed using framework analysis.

Results

Participants identified barriers and enablers to recruitment. Barriers and enablers related to the study, participants, the population of anxious children, practitioners, collaboration with other health professionals, ethics, specific settings and the context of surgical day units and the wider health system. Attempting to recruit anxious children from a surgical day unit is particularly challenging for several reasons. Issues include the practicalities of dealing with a child experiencing anxiety for parents/guardians; professional unwillingness to make things more difficult for families and clinicians and nurses valuing predictability within a busy and time-sensitive setting.

Conclusions

Multi-site RCTs face recruitment barriers relating to study-wide and site-specific factors. There are multiple barriers to recruiting anxious children due to undergo day-case surgery. Barriers across domains can interrelate and reinforce each other, reflecting challenges relating to populations and settings. For example, in the case of anxious children, parents and other health professionals are concerned about exacerbating children’s anxiety prior to surgery. They may look for ways to keep things predictable and avoid the uncertainty of an RCT. Pre-trial engagement work could help address concerns among collaborating health professionals.

Using rapid ethnography during set-up or an internal pilot to focus on how the protocol will be or has been operationalised in practice may help identify issues. Allowing time to reflect on the findings of internal pilots and implement necessary changes could facilitate higher recruitment during the main phase of a trial.

Trial registration

NIHR Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN18296119. Registered on October 01, 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05425-z.

The Effect of Dexmedetomidine on Emergence Agitation or Delirium in Children After Anesthesia-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies

Background: We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the clinical effect of dexmedetomidine in preventing pediatric emergence agitation (EA) or delirium (ED) following anesthesia compared with placebo or other sedatives. Methods: The databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched until 8th January 2020. Inclusion criteria were participants with age<18 years and studies of comparison between dexmedetomidine and placebo or other sedatives. Exclusion criteria included adult studies; duplicate publications; management with dexmedetomidine alone; review or meta-analysis; basic research; article published as abstract, letter, case report, editorial, note, method, or protocol; and article presented in non-English language. Results: Fifty-eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five case-control trials (CCTs) including 7,714 patients were included. The results showed that dexmedetomidine significantly decreased the incidence of post-anesthesia EA or ED compared with placebo [OR = 0.22, 95% CI: (0.16, 0.32), I 2 = 75, P < 0.00001], midazolam [OR = 0.36, 95% CI: (0.21, 0.63), I 2 = 57, P = 0.0003], and opioids [OR = 0.55, 95% CI: (0.33, 0.91), I 2 = 0, P = 0.02], whereas the significant difference was not exhibited compared with propofol (or pentobarbital) [OR = 0.56, 95% CI: (0.15, 2.14), I 2 = 58, P = 0.39], ketamine [OR = 0.43, 95% CI: (0.19, 1.00), I 2 = 0, P = 0.05], clonidine [OR = 0.54, 95% CI: (0.20, 1.45), P = 0.22], chloral hydrate [OR = 0.98, 95% CI: (0.26, 3.78), P = 0.98], melatonin [OR = 1.0, 95% CI: (0.13, 7.72), P = 1.00], and ketofol [OR = 0.55, 95% CI: (0.16, 1.93), P = 0.35]. Conclusion: Compared with placebo, midazolam, and opioids, dexmedetomidine significantly decreased the incidence of post-anesthesia EA or ED in pediatric patients. However, dexmedetomidine did not exhibit this superiority compared with propofol and ketamine. With regard to clonidine, chloral hydrate, melatonin, and ketofol, the results needed to be further tested due to the fact that only one trial was included for each control drug.

Prevention and Intervention Strategies to Alleviate Preoperative Anxiety in Children

Preoperative anxiety (anxiety regarding impending surgical experience) in children is a common phenomenon that has been associated with a number of negative behaviors during the surgery experience (e.g., agitation, crying, spontaneous urination, and the need for physical restraint during anesthetic induction). Preoperative anxiety has also been associated with the display of a number of maladaptive behaviors postsurgery, including postoperative pain, sleeping disturbances, parent-child conflict, and separation anxiety. For these reasons, researchers have sought out interventions to treat or prevent childhood preoperative anxiety and possibly decrease the development of negative behaviors postsurgery. Such interventions include sedative premedication, parental presence during anesthetic induction, behavioral preparation programs, music therapy, and acupuncture. The present article reviews the existing research on the various modes of intervention for preoperative anxiety in children. Clinical implications and future directions are discussed.

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.

High anxiety, young age and long waits increase the need for preoperative sedatives in children

OBJECTIVE

This prospective, observational study aimed to identify children likely to require sedation preoperatively by measuring anxiety levels using the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (mYPAS). Other possible predictive factors for preoperative sedation were also investigated.

METHODS

A total of 455 patients aged 2-12 years scheduled for surgery requiring general anaesthesia were enrolled in the study. Patients' anxiety levels were measured using the mYPAS in a preoperative holding area just before patients were separated from their parents or guardians and entered the operating theatre. Anaesthetists blindedto the mYPAS assessments judged whether the child could be separated and enter the operating theatre without a sedative. The ability of the mYPAS to predict the need for preoperative sedation was analysed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS

The optimum mYPAS cut-off for requiring sedatives was 41.7 according to ROC curve analysis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age, mYPAS>40 and waiting time were independent predictors of the requirement for sedative administration.

CONCLUSIONS

High anxiety levels, young age and long waits contributed to the need for preoperative sedation in children.

Perioperative effects of oral midazolam premedication in children undergoing skin laser treatment: a double-blinded randomized placebo-controlled trial

PURPOSE: To investigate and compare the efficacy of oral midazolam with two different dosages in orange juice on perioperative hemodynamics and behavioral changes in children who underwent skin laser treatment in an academic educational Hospital. METHODS: Ninety children, candidates for skin laser treatment were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups of 30 each: the placebo group received 0.1 ml/kg orange flavored juice, group 2 and 3 receiving 0.5 and 1 mg/kg of injectable midazolam mixed with an equal volume of orange juice, respectively. The main outcome measures included the mask acceptance, patients' behavioral scales and postoperative events. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in heart rate, respiratory rate, and systolic blood pressure among the three groups. However, arterial oxygen saturation was significantly reduced in those given 1 mg.kg-1 midazolam. The median scores of anxiety, separation from parent, preparing an intravenous line, acceptance of the oxygen mask, good sedation, crying reduction and consciousness level were better in midazolam group. Postoperative agitation and re-crying were also more frequent in placebo receivers. Those given 1 mg.kg-1 midazolam were significantly more optimal for sedation, crying, consciousness, preparing an intravenous line, and postoperative re-crying compared with 0.5 mg.kg-1 midazolam receivers. CONCLUSION: As a preanaesthetic medication, the 1 mg.kg-1 dose of orally given midazolam especially in a volume of orange juice and can optimize the children's behavior during skin laser treatment with no serious adverse effects, enhancing their parents' satisfactions about the sedative protocol.

Effectiveness of premedication agents administered prior to nitrous oxide/oxygen

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In paediatric dentistry, when anxiety, fear of dental procedures or behavioural impairment precludes the conduct of dental treatments, sedation procedures are required. However, sedation at the desired level might not be achieved despite administration of various agents. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of oral premedication with different agents on children scheduled for dental treatment under nitrous oxide/oxygen (N2O/O2) sedation.

METHODS

The present research was approved by the Ethics Committee of Gazi University Faculty of Medicine. Sixty children aged between 5 and 8 years, ASA I or II, having no mental or motor retardation, requiring at least two-visit dental treatment, having no sedation or general anaesthesia experience, and incompliant with dental treatment (Frankl Behaviour Scale>or=3), were enrolled into the study after obtaining informed parental consent. The children were then randomly assigned to one of four groups. The treatment regimen according to the study groups was as follows: oral administration of 1 mg kg(-1) hydroxyzine hydrochloride suspension (Atarax) 1 h preoperatively (group I, n=15), oral administration of 0.7 mg kg(-1) midazolam (Dormicum) 15 min preoperatively (group II, n=15), oral administration of 3 mg kg(-1) ketamine (Ketalar) with 0.25 mg kg(-1) midazolam (Dormicum) 15 min preoperatively (group III, n=15), and no oral premedication administration [group IV (controls), n=15]. Peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) and heart rate were monitored with a pulse oximeter during treatment. The sedation level was monitored with the bispectral index. Following premedication, 40% N2O and 60% O2 was administered to all groups by means of a nasal mask. Sedation depth was evaluated using the Ramsay Sedation Scale and data were recorded at 5 min intervals. Sedation success and other sedation-related events were recorded.

RESULTS

The evaluation of the findings of this study revealed that treatment procedures were completed without any serious complications. Achievement of sedation in terms of satisfactory/mid-level satisfactory/unsatisfactory was as follows: 13.3/53.3/33.3% in group I; 54/20/26% in group II; 33.3/33.3/33.3% in group III, and 6.7/60/33.3% in group IV, respectively. Ramsay Sedation Scale results revealed that the most effective medication was 0.7 mg kg(-1) midazolam.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded that 0.7 mg kg(-1) midazolam is more effective than 0.25 mg kg(-1) midazolam with 3 mg kg(-1) ketamine and 1 mg kg(-1) hydroxyzine hydrochloride in terms of oral premedication prior to N2O/O2 sedation in children scheduled for dental treatments.

[Perioperative considerations in vagal nerve stimulator implantation]

Vagal nerve stimulation has become an a important tool in the treatment of refractory epilepsy, which continues to be the main indication for this technique. Other therapeutic indications are emerging, however, and vagal nerve stimulation has now been approved for major depression. Additional possible uses under study include morbid obesity, Alzheimer disease, chronic pain syndromes, and certain neuropsychologic disorders. This review considers perioperative aspects relevant to using this therapeutic procedure with a view to facilitating better and more integrated management of its application.

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.

Premedication with melatonin vs midazolam in anxious children

AIM

Failure of dental treatment caused by anxiety is a common problem in children. Oral midazolam has been the most commonly used premedication for pediatric patient but the use of midazolam may be associated with paradoxical reactions in children. Melatonin may induce a natural sleepiness and improve sedation. We have investigated premedication with melatonin compared with midazolam in children under nitrous oxide/oxygen (N(2)O/O(2)) sedation for dental treatment.

METHODS

In a randomized study, 60 children received either 3 mg of melatonin [Melatonina (3 mg(R)) 60 min before the procedure (n = 15); group I], 0.5 mg.kg(-1) melatonin 60 min before the procedure (n = 15; group II), 0.75 mg.kg(-1) midazolam [Dormicum (15 mg/3 ml (R)) 15 min before the procedure (n = 15); group III] or 3 ml of 0.09 NaCl 15 min (n = 7) or 60 min before the procedure (n = 8; group IV) orally. The children were sedated with 40/60% N(2)O/O(2) inhalation. The heart rate and O(2) saturation were monitored during the treatment period. The level of sedation was assessed according to the Ramsay Sedation Scale. The children's sedation success during dental treatment was classified. The sedation success and other sedation-related events recorded. Comparisons among the four groups were made using one-way anova or Kruskal-Wallis test, and if any significant differences were noted, the Tukey's HSD or Mann-Whitney U-test were used for intergroup comparisons. All differences were considered significant at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

The evaluation of sedation success was as follows: group I: satisfactory (n = 1), average satisfactory (n = 4), and unsatisfactory (n = 10); group II: satisfactory (n = 2), average satisfactory (n = 3), and unsatisfactory (n = 10); group III: satisfactory (n = 9), average satisfactory (n = 6); and group IV: satisfactory (n = 1), average satisfactory (n = 3), and unsatisfactory (n = 11).

CONCLUSION

In these doses and clinical conditions, melatonin was similar to that of placebo and did not contribute to N(2)O/O(2) sedation of anxious children.

Children in day surgery: clinical practice and routines. The results from a nation-wide survey

BACKGROUND

Day surgery is common in paediatric surgical practice. Safe routines including parental and child information in order to optimise care and reduce anxiety are important. Most day surgery units are not specialised in paediatric care, which is why specific paediatric expertise is often lacking.

METHODS

We studied the practice of paediatric day surgery in Sweden by a questionnaire survey sent to all hospitals, obtaining an 88% response rate. Three specific paediatric cases were enquired for in more detail.

RESULTS

The proportion of paediatric day surgery vs. in-hospital procedures was 46%. Seventy-one out of 88 responding units performed paediatric day surgery. All units had anxiolytic pre-medication as a routine in 1-6-year-olds, and in 7-16-year-olds at 60% of the units. Most units performed circumcision and adenoidectomy, while 33% performed tonsillectomy. Anaesthesia induction was intravenous in older children, and also in 1-6-year-olds at 50% of the units. Parental presence at induction was mandatory. Post-operatively, 93% of units routinely assessed pain. Paracetamol and NSAIDs were the most common analgesics, as monotherapy or combined with rescue medication in the recovery as IV morphine. At 42% of units, take-home bags of analgesics were provided, covering 1-3 days of treatment. Pain was the most frequent complaint on follow-up. Micturition difficulties were common after circumcision, nausea after adenoidectomy and nutrition difficulties after tonsillectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

In Sweden, most day surgery units perform paediatric surgery, most children receive pre-medication, anaesthesia is induced IV and take-home analgesics paracetamol and or NSAIDs are often provided. Still, pain is a common complaint after discharge.

Effect of drinks that are added as flavoring in oral midazolam premedication on sedation success

BACKGROUND

Midazolam is one of the most frequently used agents for sedation in pediatric dentistry. The injectable form of midazolam can also be given orally. However, its bad taste has negative effects on ingestion of the drug. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of drinks which were added to mask the bitter taste of midazolam for drug acceptance and sedation.

METHODS

In the laboratory; the pH values of 2.5 ml midazolam (15 mg x 3 ml(-1)) and the mixtures of Pepsi Cola, 10% sodium citrate, fresh pomegranate juice, and fresh grapefruit juice in equal volumes were measured. Seventy-five patients between 2 and 8 years of age who were assessed to have anxiety with the Frankl Behavior Scale and whose dental treatment was planned under sedation were randomly divided into five groups. Pepsi Cola (Group I), 10% sodium citrate (Group II), pomegranate juice (Group III), and grapefruit juice (Group IV) which were added to 0.75 mg x kg(-1) midazolam in equal volumes, and (Group V) 0.75 mg x kg(-1) midazolam given orally to children. The drug compliance of children was evaluated. After 15 min, 4-5 l x min(-1) of N(2)O : O(2) (40 : 60) inhalation was started via a nasal hood. During the procedure, heart rate, and SpO2 were monitored with pulse oximetry and sedation levels with the Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS). Anesthetist, dentist, and parental satisfaction levels were recorded.

RESULTS

The groups had similar demographics, drug ingestion was better in Groups I and II, but the mean RSS was the highest in Group II (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

As well as making drug ingestion much simpler, the addition of sodium citrate to the midazolam administered orally to the children increased the effectiveness of sedation.

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.

Effect of flumazenil on recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia in children premedicated with oral midazolam before undergoing herniorrhaphy with or without caudal analgesia

PURPOSE

Oral midazolam is frequently used to treat children, but its effect on recovery from anesthesia is controversial. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of flumazenil on reversal of midazolam during recovery from sevoflurane-induced anesthesia in children who underwent caudal analgesia compared to those who did not.

METHODS

A series of 60 children 1-8 years of age, with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status of 1 or 2, who were scheduled to undergo herniorrhaphy were randomly assigned to one of four groups: group 1, control/placebo; group 2, control/flumazenil; group 3, caudal/placebo; group 4, caudal/flumazenil. After oral administration of midazolam 0.5 mg x kg(-1), anesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane and nitrous oxide in oxygen via a face mask with spontaneous ventilation. The time from the discontinuation of anesthetics to emergence was recorded, and at the time of discharge from the operating room each patient's recovery characteristics were assessed using a three-point scale.

RESULTS

Emergence from anesthesia was significantly less agitated in the group of children who underwent caudal analgesia without flumazenil compared to the other three groups. Flumazenil shortened the time to emergence regardless of the application of caudal analgesia, and caudal analgesia delayed the time to emergence regardless of flumazenil administration.

CONCLUSION

Caudal analgesia and avoiding the use of flumazenil synergistically resulted in the emergence from anesthesia in a less agitated state for children who underwent herniorrhaphy after oral midazolam premedication.

Comparative evaluation of midazolam and ketamine with midazolam alone as oral premedication

BACKGROUND

Oral premedication with midazolam and ketamine is widely used in pediatric anesthesia to reduce emotional trauma and ensure smooth induction. However, various dosing regimens when used alone or in combination have variable efficacy and side effect profile. The aim of our study was to investigate and compare the efficacy of oral midazolam alone with a low-dose combination of oral midazolam and ketamine.

METHODS

We performed a prospective randomized double-blind study in 100 children who were randomly allocated into two groups. Group M received 0.5 mg.kg(-1) oral midazolam and group MK received 0.25 mg.kg(-1) oral midazolam with 2.5 mg.kg(-1) oral ketamine. The preoperative sedation score, ease of parental separation and ease of mask acceptance were evaluated on a 4-point scale. The time to recovery from anesthesia and to achieve satisfactory Aldrete score was also noted.

RESULTS

Uniform and acceptable sedation scores were seen in both the groups (group M 95.9%; group MK 97.96%), without any serious side effects. However, the combination offered significantly more children in an awake, calm and quiet state, who were easily separated from their parents (73.46% in MK vs 41% in group M). The induction scores were comparable between the groups. The recovery room characteristics and time to achieve satisfactory Aldrete score were also comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral midazolam alone and a combination of midazolam with ketamine provide equally effective anxiolysis and separation characteristics. However, the combination provided more children in an awake, calm and quiet state who could be separated easily from parents.

Child related background factors affecting compliance with induction of anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Factors such as age, sex, behaviour problems, fears, earlier traumatic hospital events and reactions to vaccination were assessed together with behaviour observed before premedication in order to evaluate their importance in predicting response to the anaesthetic process. The anaesthetic process was divided into four endpoints; compliance when given premedication, sedation, compliance during needle insertion or when an anaesthetic mask was put in place and behaviour when put to sleep.

METHODS

A total of 102 children who were undergoing day-stay surgery and overnight stay surgery were video-filmed during premedication and anaesthetic induction. Before premedication the children and parents answered questionnaires about behaviour [Preschool Behaviour Check List (PBCL)] and fears [Fears Survey Schedule for Children-Revised (FSSC-R)]. The films were analysed to assess behaviour before and after premedication and during induction of anaesthesia. A semistructured interview was conducted with the parents during the time the children were asleep.

RESULTS

There was a significantly higher odds ratio for noncompliant behaviour during premedication if the child placed itself in the parent's lap or near the parent or had previously experienced traumatic hospital events. The odds ratio for not being sedated by premedication was higher if compliance was low when premedication was given or the child had experienced a traumatic hospital event in the past. A high odds ratio for noncompliant behaviour during venous access or placement of an anaesthetic mask was seen if the child was not sedated or the child had had a negative reaction when vaccinated. The odds ratio for falling asleep in an anxious or upset state was higher if the child had shown noncompliant behaviour during premedication, had not been sedated or had shown noncompliant behaviour during venous access or facemask placement.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall most important factor that predicts noncompliant behaviour and a distressed state in the child during the anaesthetic process was the experience of earlier traumatic hospital events including negative reaction to vaccination. All elements of the process are important in determining what will happen and all steps will influence how the child reacts when put to sleep.

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.

Ketamine and midazolam is an inappropriate preinduction combination in uncooperative children undergoing brief ambulatory procedures

BACKGROUND

We prospectively studied the effects of intramuscular (i.m.) ketamine alone, or combined with midazolam, on mask acceptance and recovery in young children who were uncooperative during induction of anaesthesia.

METHODS

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained to study 80 children, 1-3 years, scheduled for bilateral myringotomies and tube insertion (BMT). Mask induction was attempted in all the children. Those who were uncooperative were randomly assigned to one of the four preinduction treatment groups: group I, ketamine 2 mg.kg(-1); group II, ketamine 2 mg.kg(-1) combined with midazolam 0.1 mg.kg(-1); group III, ketamine 2 mg.kg(-1) with midazolam 0.2 mg.kg(-1); or group IV, ketamine 1 mg.kg(-1) with midazolam 0.2 mg.kg(-1). Anaesthesia was continued with nitrous oxide and halothane by facemask.

RESULTS

Children in all treatment groups achieved satisfactory sedation in less than 3 min following the administration of the preinduction drug(s). Compared with patients who received halothane induction (comparison group), the use of ketamine alone did not significantly (P > 0.0167, a Bonferroni corrected significance level) delay recovery and discharge times (18.8 +/- 2.5 and 82.5 +/- 30.7 min vs 12.6 +/- 4.6 and 81.0 +/- 33.8 min, P = 0.030 and P = 0.941, respectively). Patients who received ketamine/midazolam combinations, however, had significantly longer recovery and discharge times vs halothane (32.3 +/- 14.0 and 128.0 +/- 36.6 min, P = 0.001, P = 0.007, respectively). These times were so clinically unacceptable, that the study had to be terminated with only 17 patients receiving study drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

It is concluded that ketamine/midazolam combination is not appropriate for preinduction of anaesthesia in paediatric ambulatory patients because of unacceptably prolonged recovery and delayed discharge times.

Premedication with midazolam in young children: a comparison of four routes of administration

BACKGROUND

We undertook a study to determine the effects of four routes of administation on the efficacy of midazolam for premedication.

METHODS

In a randomized double-blind study, 119 unmedicated children, ASA I-II, aged 1.5-5 years, who were scheduled for minor elective surgery and who had been planned to received midazolam as a premedicant drug, were randomly assigned to one of four groups. Group I received intranasal midazolam 0.3 mg.kg-1; group II, oral midazolam 0.5 mg x kg(-1); group III, rectal midazolam 0.5 mg x kg(-1); and group IV, sublingual midazolam 0.3 mg x kg(-1). A blinded observer assessed the children for sedation and anxiolysis every 5 min prior to surgery. Quality of mask acceptance for induction, postanaesthesia care unit behaviour and parents' satisfaction were evaluated. Thirty patients were enrolled in each of groups I, III and IV. Twenty-nine patients were enrolled in group II.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in sedation and anxiety levels among the four groups. Average sedation and anxiolysis increased with time, achieving a maximum at 20 min in group I and at 30 min in groups II-IV. Patient mask acceptance was good for more than 75% of the children. Although the intranasal route provides a faster effect, it causes significant nasal irritation. Seventy-seven percent of the children from this group cried after drug administration. Most parents in all groups (67-73%) were satisfied with the premedication.

CONCLUSIONS

Intranasal, oral, rectal and sublingual midazolam produces good levels of sedation and anxiolysis. Mask acceptance for inhalation induction was easy in the majority of children, irrespective of the route of drug administration.

Effect of oral midazolam premedication on the awakening concentration of sevoflurane, recovery times and bispectral index in children

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine the influence of preoperative oral midazolam on: (i) measures of anaesthetic emergence; (ii) recovery times and (iii) intraoperative bispectral index (BIS) measurements during sevoflurane/N2O anaesthesia in paediatric patients.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients, aged 1-10 years, ASA I-II, were enrolled in a prospective double-blinded study. Patients were randomized to receive either midazolam 0.5 mg.kg(-1) (M) or midazolam vehicle (P) as premedication. After inhalation induction and intubation, expired sevoflurane was stabilized at 3% in 60% N2O and the corresponding BIS (BIS I) recorded. At the completion of surgery, sevoflurane was stabilized at 0.5% and the BIS (BIS E) again recorded. Awakening time, expired sevoflurane/N2O awakening concentrations and recovery times were recorded.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between groups in awakening time, sevoflurane or N2O awakening concentrations, time to PACU discharge, time to hospital discharge or in BIS I and BIS E measurements.

Oral midazolam premedication in preadolescents and adolescents

We sought to determine the influence of preoperative oral midazolam on 1) sedation score, 2) measures of anesthetic emergence, 3) recovery times, and 4) bispectral index (BIS) measurements during sevoflurane/N(2)O anesthesia in adolescent patients. Fifty ASA I and II patients 10-18 yr of age were enrolled in a prospective double-blinded study. Patients were randomized to receive either 20 mg of midazolam (M group) or midazolam vehicle (P group) as premedication. Before the induction, sedation scores and BIS values were determined in all patients. After inhaled induction and intubation, expired sevoflurane was stabilized at 3% in 60% N(2)O and the corresponding BIS (BIS I) recorded. Upon completion of surgery, sevoflurane was stabilized at 0.5% and the BIS (BIS E) again recorded. Plasma midazolam levels were measured at the time of BIS I and BIS E. There were no significant differences between groups in awakening time, sevoflurane/N(2)O awakening concentrations, time to postanesthesia care unit discharge, or BIS I and BIS E measurements. Sedation scores and preinduction BIS values were significantly lower in Group M than in Group P, although only 40% of midazolam-treated patients exhibited detectable sedation, with marked interindividual variability in achieved plasma midazolam levels. Detectable preoperative sedation was predictive of delayed emergence.

IMPLICATIONS

We demonstrated a measurable sedative effect of oral midazolam in adolescents which correlated with simultaneous bispectral index (BIS) measurement. Considering the overall group, midazolam premedication did not affect intraoperative BIS, emergence times, or recovery times compared with placebo controls. Detectable preoperative sedation, and not merely midazolam administration, was predictive of prolonged emergence.

Midazolam premedication delays recovery from propofol-induced sevoflurane anesthesia in children 1-3 yr

PURPOSE

To study the effect of midazolam premedication on the recovery characteristics of sevoflurane anesthesia induced with propofol in pediatric outpatients.

METHODS

Sixty children, one to three years, presenting for ambulatory adenoidectomy were randomly assigned , in a double-blind fashion, to receive either 0.5 mg x kg(-1) midazolam (Group M) or placebo (Group P) p.o. 30 min before anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced with 10 microg x kg(-1) atropine, 10 microg x kg(-1) alfentanil, and 3-4 mg x kg(-1) propofol i.v.. Tracheal intubation was facilitated with 0.2 mg x kg(-1) mivacurium. Anesthesia was maintained with nitrous oxide/oxygen (FiO2 0.3) and sevoflurane with controlled ventilation. Recovery characteristics were compared using the modified Aldrete scoring system, the Pain/Discomfort scale and measuring specific recovery end-points (emergence, full Aldrete score, discharge). A postoperative questionnaire was used to evaluate the children's well-being at home until 24 hr after discharge.

RESULTS

Emergence from anesthesia (22 +/- 9 vs 16 +/- 6 min (mean +/- SD), P = 0.005) and achieving full Aldrete scores (30 +/- 11 vs 24 +/- 16 min, P = 0.006) were delayed in patients receiving midazolam. Children in the placebo group were given postoperative analgesia sooner than those in the midazolam group (18 +/- 11 vs 23 +/- 8 min, P = 0.009). More children premedicated with midazolam suffered from arousal distress (20% vs 3%, P = 0.04) and scored higher on the Pain/Discomfort scale (P = 0.004) at 20 min after arrival in the recovery room. Discharge was not affected by premedication and well-being at home was similar in the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral premedication with midazolam delays early recovery but not discharge after ambulatory sevoflurane anesthesia induced with propofol in children one to three years. Midazolam did not improve the quality of recovery.

Premedication with midazolam delays recovery after ambulatory sevoflurane anesthesia in children

We studied the effect of oral premedication with midazolam on the recovery characteristics of sevoflurane anesthesia in small children. In a randomized, double-blinded study, 60 children (1-3 yr, ASA physical status I or II) undergoing ambulatory adenoidectomy received either midazolam 0.5 mg/kg (Group M) or placebo (Group P) PO approximately 30 min before the induction of anesthesia. All children received atropine 0.01 mg/kg IV and alfentanil 10 microg/kg IV before the induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane up to 8 vol% inspired concentration in N2O 67% in O2. Tracheal intubation was facilitated with mivacurium 0.2 mg/kg. Anesthesia was continued with sevoflurane adjusted to maintain hemodynamic stability. In the postanesthesia care unit, predetermined recovery end points (emergence, recovery, discharge) were recorded. A pain/ discomfort scale was used to determine the quality of recovery. A postoperative questionnaire was used to evaluate the well-being of the patient at home 24 h after surgery. Emergence (spontaneous eye opening), recovery (full points on the modified Aldrete scale), and discharge were achieved later in Group M than in Group P (15+/-6 vs. 11+/-3 min [P = 0.002], 25+/-17 vs. 16+/-6 min [P = 0.01], and 80+/-23 vs. 70+/-23 min [P = 0.03]). Side effects, postanesthetic excitement, and analgesic treatment did not differ significantly between groups. At home, more children in Group P (30%) experienced disturbed sleep during the night compared with those in Group M (4%) (P = 0.007).

IMPLICATIONS

In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, premedication with midazolam 0.5 mg/kg PO delayed recovery in children 1-3 yr of age after brief (<30 min) sevoflurane anesthesia. Except for more peaceful sleep at home, premedication did not affect the quality of recovery.

Newer drugs in pediatric anesthesia

Recent developments in pharmacology have offered new and broader options to the anesthesiologist caring for pediatric patients. Many new drugs do not have specific indications for use in the pediatric population, but clinical studies have examined the utility and cost-effectiveness of some of these agents. Information is presented on drugs used for premedication, induction, and maintenance of anesthesia. The clinical pharmacology of several new nondepolarizing muscle relaxants, and the recent controversy with regard to the use of succinylcholine also are presented. New drugs used in topical and regional anesthesia as well as options for anti-emetic therapy are discussed.

Distress at induction of anaesthesia in children. A survey of incidence, associated factors and recovery characteristics

This study analysed the frequency of distress at induction (DAI) in 2122 paediatric patients. The data were analysed to assess predictors of DAI and to examine associations between predictors of DAI and recovery characteristics. Patient age, preoperative behaviour, premedication (oral midazolam, n = 480) and venue for anaesthesia induction were associated with changes in the incidence of DAI. Distressed preoperative behaviour was a good predictor of DAI in all age groups. Premedication reduced the incidence of DAI in children aged 0.5-2 years old, and in older children who were distressed preoperatively. Induction in the Day Surgery Unit was associated with a reduction of the incidence of DAI in younger children. Children with DAI were more likely to suffer from distress at arousal (P = 0.001). Average early recovery time was prolonged 4.4 minutes and average discharge time in day patients was delayed 36 minutes by the use of oral midazolam premedication. Premedication was not significantly associated with arousal distress. We conclude that a policy of optimizing nonpharmacological approaches for minimizing induction distress, combined with selective premedication with oral midazolam, can produce a low incidence of induction distress and adverse effects.