Sedation of difficult-to-sedate children undergoing MR imaging: value of thioridazine as an adjunct to chloral hydrate

Effects of Dextrose Supplementation on Chloral Hydrate Sedation: A Double-Blinded, Randomized, Prospective Study

Sedation plays a crucial role in successful pediatric imaging, and chloral hydrate is commonly used for this purpose. However, the challenges associated with chloral hydrate administration, such as its unpleasant taste and potential induction of vomiting, remain a concern. Sweet oral solutions have emerged as potential solutions for reducing distress and providing analgesia. This study compared the efficacy of dextrose combined with chloral hydrate with that of conventional sedation methods. This prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical study enrolled 160 pediatric outpatients scheduled for echocardiography. Chloral hydrate syrup (100 mg/mL) was supplemented with a dextrose solution (dextrose group) or distilled water (control group) in a 1:10 volume ratio. The sedation achievement time, Skeie scale score, revised Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability (FLACC) score, and side effects (nausea, vomiting, hypoxia, and respiratory depression) were assessed. No significant difference in average time to achieve sedation was observed between the dextrose and control groups (24.4±17.8 vs. 24.7±17.1 min, p=0.92). Both groups demonstrated similar levels of sedation according to the Skeie scale and mean revised FLACC score. Although the occurrence rates of nausea and vomiting had no significant differences, the dextrose group had no cases of vomiting in children aged >24 months compared to the control group, which had three cases (30%). In conclusion, the addition of dextrose to chloral hydrate did not significantly affect sedation time, anxiety, pain reduction, or occurrence of gastrointestinal complications during sedation.

Needle-free pharmacological sedation techniques in paediatric patients for imaging procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sedation techniques and drugs are increasingly used in children undergoing imaging procedures. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we present an overview of literature concerning sedation of children aged 0-8 yr for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedures using needle-free pharmacological techniques.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for studies on the use of needle-free pharmacological sedation techniques for MRI procedures in children aged 0-8 yr. Studies using i.v. or i.m. medication or advanced airway devices were excluded. We performed a meta-analysis on sedation success rate. Secondary outcomes were onset time, duration, recovery, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies were included, with 22 380 participants. The pooled success rate for oral chloral hydrate was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-0.96); for oral chloral hydrate and intranasal dexmedetomidine 95% (95% CI: 0.92-0.97); for rectal, oral, or intranasal midazolam 36% (95% CI: 0.14-0.65); for oral pentobarbital 99% (95% CI: 0.90-1.00); for rectal thiopental 92% (95% CI: 0.85-0.96); for oral melatonin 75% (95% CI: 0.54-0.89); for intranasal dexmedetomidine 62% (95% CI: 0.38-0.82); for intranasal dexmedetomidine and midazolam 94% (95% CI: 0.78-0.99); and for inhaled sevoflurane 98% (95% CI: 0.97-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a large variation in medication, dosage, and route of administration for needle-free sedation. Success rates for sedation techniques varied between 36% and 98%.

Chloral hydrate as a sedating agent for neurodiagnostic procedures in children

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review published in 2017. Paediatric neurodiagnostic investigations, including brain neuroimaging and electroencephalography (EEG), play an important role in the assessment of neurodevelopmental disorders. The use of an appropriate sedative agent is important to ensure the successful completion of the neurodiagnostic procedures, particularly in children, who are usually unable to remain still throughout the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of chloral hydrate as a sedative agent for non-invasive neurodiagnostic procedures in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 14 May 2020, with no language restrictions: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 12 May 2020). CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the specialised registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Cochrane Epilepsy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that assessed chloral hydrate agent against other sedative agent(s), non-drug agent(s), or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently evaluated studies identified by the search for their eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Results were expressed in terms of risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies with a total of 2922 children. The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed. Blinding of the participants and personnel was not achieved in most of the included studies, and three of the 16 studies were at high risk of bias for selective reporting. Evaluation of the efficacy of the sedative agents was also underpowered, with all the comparisons performed in small studies. Fewer children who received oral chloral hydrate had sedation failure compared with oral promethazine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.82; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). More children who received oral chloral hydrate had sedation failure after one dose compared to intravenous pentobarbital (RR 4.33, 95% CI 1.35 to 13.89; 1 study; low-certainty evidence), but there was no clear difference after two doses (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 27.46; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Children with oral chloral hydrate had more sedation failure compared with rectal sodium thiopental (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.96; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence) and music therapy (RR 17.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 122.14; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Sedation failure rates were similar between groups for comparisons with oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, oral midazolam and oral clonidine. Children who received oral chloral hydrate had a shorter time to adequate sedation compared with those who received oral dexmedetomidine (MD -3.86, 95% CI -5.12 to -2.6; 1 study), oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride (MD -7.5, 95% CI -7.85 to -7.15; 1 study), oral promethazine (MD -12.11, 95% CI -18.48 to -5.74; 1 study) (moderate-certainty evidence for three aforementioned outcomes), rectal midazolam (MD -95.70, 95% CI -114.51 to -76.89; 1 study), and oral clonidine (MD -37.48, 95% CI -55.97 to -18.99; 1 study) (low-certainty evidence for two aforementioned outcomes). However, children with oral chloral hydrate took longer to achieve adequate sedation when compared with intravenous pentobarbital (MD 19, 95% CI 16.61 to 21.39; 1 study; low-certainty evidence), intranasal midazolam (MD 12.83, 95% CI 7.22 to 18.44; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence), and intranasal dexmedetomidine (MD 2.80, 95% CI 0.77 to 4.83; 1 study, moderate-certainty evidence). Children who received oral chloral hydrate appeared significantly less likely to complete neurodiagnostic procedure with child awakening when compared with rectal sodium thiopental (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.09; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). Chloral hydrate was associated with a higher risk of the following adverse events: desaturation versus rectal sodium thiopental (RR 5.00, 95% 0.24 to 102.30; 1 study), unsteadiness versus intranasal dexmedetomidine (MD 10.21, 95% CI 0.58 to 178.52; 1 study), vomiting versus intranasal dexmedetomidine (MD 10.59, 95% CI 0.61 to 185.45; 1 study) (low-certainty evidence for aforementioned three outcomes), and crying during administration of sedation versus intranasal dexmedetomidine (MD 1.39, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.80; 1 study, moderate-certainty evidence). Chloral hydrate was associated with a lower risk of the following: diarrhoea compared with rectal sodium thiopental (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.72; 1 study), lower mean diastolic blood pressure compared with sodium thiopental (MD 7.40, 95% CI 5.11 to 9.69; 1 study), drowsiness compared with oral clonidine (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.64; 1 study), vertigo compared with oral clonidine (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.79; 1 study) (moderate-certainty evidence for aforementioned four outcomes), and bradycardia compared with intranasal dexmedetomidine (MD 0.17, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.59; 1 study; high-certainty evidence). No other adverse events were significantly associated with chloral hydrate, although there was an increased risk of combined adverse events overall (RR 7.66, 95% CI 1.78 to 32.91; 1 study; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The certainty of evidence for the comparisons of oral chloral hydrate against several other methods of sedation was variable. Oral chloral hydrate appears to have a lower sedation failure rate when compared with oral promethazine. Sedation failure was similar between groups for other comparisons such as oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, and oral midazolam. Oral chloral hydrate had a higher sedation failure rate when compared with intravenous pentobarbital, rectal sodium thiopental, and music therapy. Chloral hydrate appeared to be associated with higher rates of adverse events than intranasal dexmedetomidine. However, the evidence for the outcomes for oral chloral hydrate versus intravenous pentobarbital, rectal sodium thiopental, intranasal dexmedetomidine, and music therapy was mostly of low certainty, therefore the findings should be interpreted with caution. Further research should determine the effects of oral chloral hydrate on major clinical outcomes such as successful completion of procedures, requirements for an additional sedative agent, and degree of sedation measured using validated scales, which were rarely assessed in the studies included in this review. The safety profile of chloral hydrate should be studied further, especially for major adverse effects such as oxygen desaturation.

Normal imaging laterality on magnetic resonance imaging of the medial epicondyle of the elbow on the dominant side of adolescent male baseball players

OBJECTIVE

Multimodality elbow screening of adolescent baseball players shows apparent laterality in morphology and signal intensity of the medial epicondyle on dedicated magnetic resonance imaging. We aimed to elucidate actual imaging laterality in the medial epicondyle by comparing magnetic resonance images of the dominant and contradominant elbows and to clarify the clinical meaning and mechanism of this phenomenon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a 0.2-T dedicated magnetic resonance imaging scanner. Eighty adolescent baseball players were enrolled and divided into four age groups: 9-10 years (13 patients); 11 years (28 patients); 12 years (24 patients) and 13-14 years (15 patients). The long and short axes of the ossification center and distance of the epiphyseal plate and the cartilage of the lower pole of the medial epicondyle were measured. Signal intensity of the ossification center was visually evaluated.

RESULTS

Owing to their age, ossification and cartilage size on the dominant side were significantly larger in all boys (P < 0.01). All age groups had larger ossification and cartilage in the dominant elbow (P < 0.01). Ossification showed an apparent lower signal intensity on the dominant side (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Larger ossification and cartilage size of the medial epicondyle in the dominant elbow suggested that the medial collateral ligament to the medial epicondyle induces excessive repetitive tensile stress, but without clinical symptoms. Functional or microanatomical damage of the medial epicondyle may induce a lower ossification signal in the dominant elbow, thereby decreasing fatty bone marrow and inducing sclerotic changes.

Chloral hydrate as a sedating agent for neurodiagnostic procedures in children

BACKGROUND

Paediatric neurodiagnostic investigations, including brain neuroimaging and electroencephalography (EEG), play an important role in the assessment of neurodevelopmental disorders. The use of an appropriate sedative agent is important to ensure the successful completion of the neurodiagnostic procedures, particularly in children, who are usually unable to remain still throughout the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of chloral hydrate as a sedative agent for non-invasive neurodiagnostic procedures in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Epilepsy Group. We searched MEDLINE (OVID SP) (1950 to July 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, Issue 7, 2017), Embase (1980 to July 2017), and the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (via CENTRAL) using a combination of keywords and MeSH headings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed chloral hydrate agent against other sedative agent(s), non-drug agent(s), or placebo for children undergoing non-invasive neurodiagnostic procedures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies for their eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Results were expressed in terms of risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 studies with a total of 2390 children. The studies were all conducted in hospitals that provided neurodiagnostic services. Most studies assessed the proportion of sedation failure during the neurodiagnostic procedure, time for adequate sedation, and potential adverse effects associated with the sedative agent.The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed, as reflected by a wide variation in their 'Risk of bias' profiles. Blinding of the participants and personnel was not achieved in most of the included studies, and three of the 13 studies had high risk of bias for selective reporting. Evaluation of the efficacy of the sedative agents was also underpowered, with all the comparisons performed in single small studies.Children who received oral chloral hydrate had lower sedation failure when compared with oral promethazine (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.82; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). Children who received oral chloral hydrate had a higher risk of sedation failure after one dose compared to those who received intravenous pentobarbital (RR 4.33, 95% CI 1.35 to 13.89; 1 study, low-quality evidence), but after two doses there was no evidence of a significant difference between the two groups (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 27.46; 1 study, very low-quality evidence). Children who received oral chloral hydrate appeared to have more sedation failure when compared with music therapy, but the quality of evidence was very low for this outcome (RR 17.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 122.14; 1 study). Sedation failure rates were similar between oral chloral hydrate, oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, and oral midazolam.Children who received oral chloral hydrate had a shorter time to achieve adequate sedation when compared with those who received oral dexmedetomidine (MD -3.86, 95% CI -5.12 to -2.6; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride (MD -7.5, 95% CI -7.85 to -7.15; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), oral promethazine (MD -12.11, 95% CI -18.48 to -5.74; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence), and rectal midazolam (MD -95.70, 95% CI -114.51 to -76.89; 1 study). However, children with oral chloral hydrate took longer to achieve adequate sedation when compared with intravenous pentobarbital (MD 19, 95% CI 16.61 to 21.39; 1 study, low-quality evidence) and intranasal midazolam (MD 12.83, 95% CI 7.22 to 18.44; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence).No data were available to assess the proportion of children with successful completion of neurodiagnostic procedure without interruption by the child awakening. Most trials did not assess adequate sedation as measured by specific validated scales, except in the comparison of chloral hydrate versus intranasal midazolam and oral promethazine.Compared to dexmedetomidine, chloral hydrate was associated with a higher risk of nausea and vomiting (RR 12.04 95% CI 1.58 to 91.96). No other adverse events were significantly associated with chloral hydrate (including behavioural change, oxygen desaturation) although there was an increased risk of adverse events overall (RR 7.66, 95% CI 1.78 to 32.91; 1 study, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of evidence for the comparisons of oral chloral hydrate against several other methods of sedation was very variable. Oral chloral hydrate appears to have a lower sedation failure rate when compared with oral promethazine for children undergoing paediatric neurodiagnostic procedures. The sedation failure was similar for other comparisons such as oral dexmedetomidine, oral hydroxyzine hydrochloride, and oral midazolam. When compared with intravenous pentobarbital and music therapy, oral chloral hydrate had a higher sedation failure rate. However, it must be noted that the evidence for the outcomes for the comparisons of oral chloral hydrate against intravenous pentobarbital and music therapy was of very low to low quality, therefore the corresponding findings should be interpreted with caution.Further research should determine the effects of oral chloral hydrate on major clinical outcomes such as successful completion of procedures, requirements for additional sedative agent, and degree of sedation measured using validated scales, which were rarely assessed in the studies included in this review. The safety profile of chloral hydrate should be studied further, especially the risk of major adverse effects such as bradycardia, hypotension, and oxygen desaturation.

Exhaled nitric oxide predicts persistence of wheezing, exacerbations, and decline in lung function in wheezy infants and toddlers

BACKGROUND

There are limited data assessing the predictive value of fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FENO ) for persistence of wheezing, exacerbations, or lung function change over time in infants/toddlers with recurrent wheezing.

OBJECTIVES

In an ongoing longitudinal cohort of infants and toddlers with recurrent wheezing, we compared predictive values of single-breath FENO (SB-FENO ), tidal-breathing mixed expired FENO (tidal-FENO ), bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) and the Castro-Rodriquez Asthma Predictive Index (API) for persistence of wheezing, exacerbations and lung function change through age 3 years.

METHODS

Enrolment forced expiratory flows and volumes infant pulmonary function tests (iPFTs) were measured in 44 infants/toddlers using the raised volume rapid thoracoabdominal compression method. SB-FENO was measured at 50 mL/s, and tidal-FENO was measured during awake tidal breathing. Clinical outcomes were assessed at age 3 years in 42 infants. Follow-up iPFTs were completed between ages 2.5-3 years in 32 subjects.

RESULTS

An enrolment SB-FENO concentration ≥ 30 p.p.b. predicted persistence of wheezing at age 3 years with a sensitivity of 77%, a specificity of 94%, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.74-0.98). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive values of SB-FENO for persistence of wheezing and exacerbations were superior to tidal-FENO , BDR, and the API. SB-FENO ≥ 30 p.p.b. and tidal-FENO ≥ 7 p.p.b. measured at enrolment was associated with a decline in both FEV0.5 and FEF25-75 between enrolment and age 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

In wheezy infants/toddlers, SB-FENO was superior to tidal-FENO , BDR, and the API in predicting future exacerbations and persistence of wheezing at age 3 years. Both SB-FENO and tidal-FENO were associated with lung function decline over time.

Reviewing the use of antipsychotic drugs in people with intellectual disability

INTRODUCTION

Antipsychotics are the most widely prescribed drugs in people with intellectual disability even if schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders do not affect more than 3% of such population. Many authors outline the lack of studies on the efficacy of antipsychotics on schizophrenia or other psychotic disorders in people with intellectual disability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The aim of the present study is to review all evidences resulting from international trials selected by Medline, and compare efficacy and side effects of different antipsychotics in people with both intellectual disability and psychotic disorders and/or behavioural disorders.

RESULTS

195 studies were identified; 117 concern traditional antipychotics while 78 new generation ones. If we consider the type of studies, it results that only the 12.8% of all production is represented by meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and randomised and not controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews would be the golden standard for therapeutical studies; unfortunately they are really few in this field. It is anyway significative that all the studies reported focus on the use of antipsychotics in people with intellectual disability presenting behavioural problems. To increase the validity of these studies it is recommendable to proceed only with well-designed studies, possibly double-blind versus placebo or other medications. There is need to define precise inclusion criteria, precise symptomatological or behavioural targets and adaptative ability assessment, using valid and reliable diagnostic instruments.

Pediatric imaging: sedation with an injection formulation modified for rectal administration

PURPOSE

To determine if rectal sedation with thiopental sodium produced for intravenous administration provides safe and effective sedation for children undergoing diagnostic imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five hundred twenty-five consecutive children (mean age, 2.7 years +/- 2.2 [SD]) underwent magnetic resonance imaging (n = 425), computed tomography (n = 89), and nuclear medicine (n = 11) examinations after rectal administration of thiopental sodium injection solution. The solution was prepared from thiopental sodium powder mixed with sterile water to create a concentration of 100 mg/mL. The dose ranged from 25 to 40 mg per kilogram of body weight, with a total dose limit of 1.5 g. The percentages of successful sedations and adverse reactions were evaluated on the basis of data collected at the time of the sedation.

RESULTS

Sedation was successful in 504 (96%) children. Ten (2%) children experienced desaturation, but only three of the 10 experienced sedation failure. All cases of desaturation were treated successfully with head repositioning, administration of supplemental oxygen, or both. No children experienced vomiting, acute rectal irritation, paradoxical hyperactivity, or prolonged sedation.

CONCLUSION

Thiopental sodium sedation for pediatric imaging, with use of a rectal solution prepared from thiopental sodium preparation for intravenous injection, is safe and effective.

Adverse sedation events in pediatrics: analysis of medications used for sedation

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic investigation of medications associated with adverse sedation events in pediatric patients using critical incident analysis of case reports.

METHODS

One hundred eighteen case reports from the adverse drug reporting system of the Food and Drug Administration, the US Pharmacopoeia, and the results of a survey of pediatric specialists were used. Outcome measures were death, permanent neurologic injury, prolonged hospitalization without injury, and no harm. The overall results of the critical incident analysis are reported elsewhere. The current investigation specifically examined the relationship between outcome and medications: individual and classes of drugs, routes of administration, drug combinations and interactions, medication errors and overdoses, patterns of drug use, practitioners, and venues of sedation.

RESULTS

Ninety-five incidents fulfilled study criteria and all 4 reviewers agreed on causation; 60 resulted in death or permanent neurologic injury. Review of adverse sedation events indicated that there was no relationship between outcome and drug class (opioids; benzodiazepines; barbiturates; sedatives; antihistamines; and local, intravenous, or inhalation anesthetics) or route of administration (oral, rectal, nasal, intramuscular, intravenous, local infiltration, and inhalation). Negative outcomes (death and permanent neurologic injury) were often associated with drug overdose (n = 28). Some drug overdoses were attributable to prescription/transcription errors, although none of 39 overdoses in 34 patients seemed to be a decimal point error. Negative outcomes were also associated with drug combinations and interactions. The use of 3 or more sedating medications compared with 1 or 2 medications was strongly associated with adverse outcomes (18/20 vs 7/70). Nitrous oxide in combination with any other class of sedating medication was frequently associated with adverse outcomes (9/10). Dental specialists had the greatest frequency of negative outcomes associated with the use of 3 or more sedating medications. Adverse events occurred despite drugs being administered within acceptable dosing limits. Negative outcomes were also associated with drugs administered by nonmedically trained personnel and drugs administered at home. Some injuries occurred on the way to a facility after administration of sedatives at home; some took place in automobiles or at home after discharge from medical supervision. Deaths and injuries after discharge from medical supervision were associated with the use of medications with long half-lives (chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, promazine, promethazine, and chlorpromazine).

CONCLUSIONS

Adverse sedation events were frequently associated with drug overdoses and drug interactions, particularly when 3 or more drugs were used. Adverse outcome was associated with all routes of drug administration and all classes of medication, even those (such as chloral hydrate) thought to have minimal effect on respiration. Patients receiving medications with long plasma half-lives may benefit from a prolonged period of postsedation observation. Adverse events occurred when sedative medications were administered outside the safety net of medical supervision. Uniform monitoring and training standards should be instituted regardless of the subspecialty or venue of practice. Standards of care, scope of practice, resource management, and reimbursement for sedation should be based on the depth of sedation achieved (ie, the degree of vigilance and resuscitation skills required) rather than on the drug class, route of drug administration, practitioner, or venue.

Adverse sedation events in pediatrics: a critical incident analysis of contributing factors

OBJECTIVE

Factors that contribute to adverse sedation events in children undergoing procedures were examined using the technique of critical incident analysis.

METHODOLOGY

We developed a database that consists of descriptions of adverse sedation events derived from the Food and Drug Administration's adverse drug event reporting system, from the US Pharmacopeia, and from a survey of pediatric specialists. One hundred eighteen reports were reviewed for factors that may have contributed to the adverse sedation event. The outcome, ranging in severity from death to no harm, was noted. Individual reports were first examined separately by 4 physicians trained in pediatric anesthesiology, pediatric critical care medicine, or pediatric emergency medicine. Only reports for which all 4 reviewers agreed on the contributing factors and outcome were included in the final analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 95 incidents with consensus agreement on the contributing factors, 51 resulted in death, 9 in permanent neurologic injury, 21 in prolonged hospitalization without injury, and in 14 there was no harm. Patients receiving sedation in nonhospital-based settings compared with hospital-based settings were older and healthier. The venue of sedation was not associated with the incidence of presenting respiratory events (eg, desaturation, apnea, laryngospasm, approximately 80% in each venue) but more cardiac arrests occurred as the second (53.6% vs 14%) and third events (25% vs 7%) in nonhospital-based facilities. Inadequate resuscitation was rated as being a determinant of adverse outcome more frequently in nonhospital-based events (57.1% vs 2.3%). Death and permanent neurologic injury occurred more frequently in nonhospital-based facilities (92.8% vs 37.2%). Successful outcome (prolonged hospitalization without injury or no harm) was associated with the use of pulse oximetry compared with a lack of any documented monitoring that was associated with unsuccessful outcome (death or permanent neurologic injury). In addition, pulse oximetry monitoring of patients sedated in hospitals was uniformly associated with successful outcomes whereas in the nonhospital-based venue, 4 out of 5 suffered adverse outcomes. Adverse outcomes despite the benefit of an early warning regarding oxygenation likely reflect lack of skill in assessment and in the use of appropriate interventions, ie, a failure to rescue the patient.

CONCLUSIONS

This study-a critical incident analysis-identifies several features associated with adverse sedation events and poor outcome. There were differences in outcomes for venue: adverse outcomes (permanent neurologic injury or death) occurred more frequently in a nonhospital-based facility, whereas successful outcomes (prolonged hospitalization or no harm) occurred more frequently in a hospital-based setting. Inadequate resuscitation was more often associated with a nonhospital-based setting. Inadequate and inconsistent physiologic monitoring (particularly failure to use or respond appropriately to pulse oximetry) was another major factor contributing to poor outcome in all venues. Other issues rated by the reviewers were: inadequate presedation medical evaluation, lack of an independent observer, medication errors, and inadequate recovery procedures. Uniform, specialty-independent guidelines for monitoring children during and after sedation are essential. Age and size-appropriate equipment and medications for resuscitation should be immediately available regardless of the location where the child is sedated. All health care providers who sedate children, regardless of practice venue, should have advanced airway assessment and management training and be skilled in the resuscitation of infants and children so that they can successfully rescue their patient should an adverse sedation event occur.

Caring for the patient with mental retardation in the emergency department

There are approximately 6 million individuals with a diagnosis of mental retardation in the United States. Because of deinstitutionalization of patients with mental retardation, coupled with an increase in their life expectancy, emergency physicians are increasingly encountering and managing patients with mental retardation in the emergency department. Many emergency physicians are uncomfortable when interacting with individuals with mental retardation, which often carries over to the assessment and management of these patients in the ED. The purpose of this review is to aid the emergency physician in understanding the patient with mental retardation, their comorbid conditions, and the approach to evaluating and managing these patients in the ED.

Paediatric sedation for CT scanning: the safety and efficacy of quinalbarbitone in a district general hospital setting

The aim of this study was to review retrospectively the safety and efficacy of a paediatric sedation protocol in a district general hospital radiology department. 256 children attended for CT scanning over a 40-month period. 40 children required sedation and were given quinalbarbitone. 34 (85%) of this group were adequately sedated. Of the children who received quinalbarbitone, 35 were under 5 years of age. 32 of this group (91.4%) were adequately sedated. Failures in children under 5 years were all caused by problems with administration whilst failures in the older children were due to paradoxical excitement. No problems with respiratory depression were encountered. Sedation can be safely performed in a district general hospital radiology department if a structured protocol is adhered to. Quinalbarbitone is a safe, effective oral agent in children under the age of 5 years.

Efficacy and safety of rectal thiopental: sedation for children undergoing computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging

PURPOSE

We evaluated the clinical safety, effectiveness, efficiency and potential side effects of rectally administered thiopental in 30 children undergoing computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

The doses of thiopental used were 50 mg/kg for infants under 6 months of age, 35 mg/kg for infants between 6 and 12 months of age and 25 mg/kg for older children. After administration of the sedative, oxygen saturation was continuously monitored and vital signs were recorded every 20 min during the imaging procedure and then every 20 min until discharge.

RESULTS

Successful sedation and adequate imaging were obtained in 29 of 30 (96.7%) patients. Respiratory depression was not observed in any patient. However, oxygen saturation dropped below 90% transiently (to 88%) in three patients (10.0%) and this was immediately corrected by repositioning the child's neck to open the upper airway. All successfully sedated patients were asleep within 15 min (mean +/- SD 7.3 +/- 2.7 min) and sedation was sufficient for at least 30 min. Prolonged sedation was observed in two patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that rectal thiopental is a safe, effective and efficient form of sedation for pediatric imaging.

Magnetic resonance imaging of children without sedation: preparation with simulation

OBJECTIVE

It was hypothesized that a scanner simulator that replicates the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) environment could be used to prepare pediatric subjects for successful completion of a diagnostic-quality MRI examination without pharmacological sedation.

METHOD

Sixteen healthy children, 6 to 17 years of age, were matched for age and sex with 16 psychotropic medication-naive children with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Distress was measured throughout simulation and scanning procedures using heart rate and a self-report distress scale. Ten healthy children, 6 to 17 years of age, also underwent the same actual MRI scanning procedure but did not undergo the simulation scanning procedure.

RESULTS

Significant decreases in heart rate and self-reported distress level were observed in all subjects during the simulator session that were maintained to the end of the actual scanner experience. All subjects successfully completed MRI examinations without chemical restraint. Subjects who were not trained in the simulator had higher heart rates and self-reported distress levels in the actual scanner than did simulation-trained subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulation without pharmacological sedation successfully prepared pediatric subjects in this pilot study for high-quality MRI studies. Subject preparation may be an alternative procedure to sedation for routine MRI examination in healthy and anxious children 6 years of age and older.

Does a sedative dose of chloral hydrate modify the EEG of children with epilepsy?

Chloral hydrate (CH) is used to sedate children unable to cooperate during investigations such as EEG requiring the patient to be still. It is not known if CH or its metabolites modify the EEG and our aim was to answer this question. Recordings of the EEG before, during and after rectal administration of CH (50-77 mg/kg) in 13 children aged 1.5-13.5 years with severe epilepsy and additional neurological impairments were made. All children had frequent spike-wave activity before CH. In 9 children CH had no effect on the EEG. In 3 children there was a significant reduction in epileptic activity after 20-50 min and in one a significant increase. Cardiovascular parameters were stable throughout. At sedative doses, CH can generally be used before an EEG recording without loss of information but in 4 out of 13 children there were changes which could alter interpretation.