Comparison of oral Midazolam-Ketamine and Midazolam-Promethazine as sedative agents in pediatric dentistry

Promethazine hydrochloride reduces children's agitation during ocular examination for trauma

Examination and intervention are always the causes of agitation, anxiety, and fear in children's lives. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of promethazine hydrochloride in reducing children's agitation during the ocular examination for trauma. In this interventional-clinical trial study, a total of 62 children referred to Al-Zahra Ophthalmology Hospital in Zahedan, Iran, were evaluated in two matched groups (case (n = 31) and control (n = 31)) for an initial examination of ocular trauma. Finally, the intervention was performed (giving placebo or promethazine hydrochloride cough syrup 20 minutes before the initial ocular examination at 0.5 mg/kg), and the demographic information form and researcher-made questionnaire modeled on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) were completed. The obtained results revealed that the mean scores of physical/aggressive behaviors (p ˂ 0.001), physical/nonaggressive behaviors (p = 0.013), verbal/aggressive behaviors (p ˂ 0.001), and hiding behaviors (p ˂ 0.001) were significantly lower in the promethazine hydrochloride-receiving group than the placebo group. These findings demonstrated that promethazine hydrochloride cough syrup facilitated the examination among the pediatric patients who suffered from traumatic ocular injuries. However, further studies in this field need to be carried out through randomized controlled trials.

A comparative study of propofol alone and propofol combined with midazolam for dental treatments in special needs patients

Although dental treatment with sedation is performed increasingly in special needs patients, data on adding midazolam to intravenous propofol sedation are very limited for this group. The purpose of this study was to identify the factors and procedure time associated with the use of intravenous sedation with propofol alone or propofol combined with midazolam in dental patients with special needs.This was a retrospective data analysis. The sedation medications and relevant covariates, including demographic parameters, disability levels, oral health conditions, dental procedures, treatment time, and side effects, of 718 patients with special needs were collected between April 2013 and September 2014. The unfavorable side effects by sedation types were reported. Factors associated with procedure time and the sedation medications were assessed with multiple logistic regression analyses.Of 718 patients, 8 patients experienced unfavorable side effects (vomiting, sleepiness, or emotional disturbance) after the dental procedures; the rate was 0.6% in the 509 patients who received propofol only. In 209 patients who received propofol and midazolam, 2.4% experienced the side effects. Sedation time was associated with body mass index (BMI) < 25 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-2.04) and the performance of multiple dental procedures (aOR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.06-1.97) but not associated with the sedation types. A significant odds ratio for the combined use of propofol and midazolam was shown for adolescents (aOR = 2.22, 95% CI: 1.28-3.86), men (aOR = 2.05, 95% CI: 1.41-2.98), patients with cognitive impairment (aOR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.21-3.29), and patients undergoing scaling procedures (aOR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.13-2.39).With the acceptable side effects of the use of propofol alone and propofol combined with midazolam, multiple dental procedures increase the sedation time and the factors associated with the combined use of propofol and midazolam are younger age, male sex, recognition problems, and the type dental procedure in the dental treatment of patients with special needs.

Promethazine and Oral Midazolam Preanesthetic Children Medication

AIMS

Several kinds of drugs have been investigated in preschool children as a preanesthetic sedation after various routes of administration for surgeries. This study aims to compare the efficacy of promethazine and oral midazolam for premedication in children aged 3 to 9 years who were scheduled for surgeries.

METHODS

This is a double-blind randomized controlled study conducted on 93 patients between the age of 3 and 9 years at Loresten University of Medical Sciences Teaching Hospital, Khoramabad, Iran. The subjects were grouped into P (promethazine), M (midazolam), and C (control). About 0.3 mg/kg of oral promethazine was administered to patients in group P, 0.5 mg/kg of oral midazolam was administered to patients in group M, and 3 mL of normal saline as placebo was administered to patients in group C. Patient satisfaction, sedation and emotional score, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure, respiratory rate (RR), and heart rate (HR) were recorded.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference among the 3 groups. However, the period after medication, it was observed that SBP, diastolic blood pressure, RR, and HR in group C were statistically significantly higher than those in groups M and P. These 2 groups are similar in terms of SBP, RR, and HR. The emotional scores were comparable for the 2 groups. It was between 3.97 ± 0.6 to 1.7 ± 0.5 in group M and from 3.45 ± 1.17 to 2.745 ± 0.997 in group P in a Kruskal-Wallis test.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that both test groups reduce stress at the time of anesthetic induction and separation from their parents with similar effect. Both of the anesthetics are easily administered without the necessity of an additional equipment. A shorter period to maximal sedation for midazolam is an advantage, thus, making the drug helpful, mostly in the outpatient setting.

A Comparative Evaluation of the Sedative Effects of Nitrous Oxide-oxygen Inhalation and Oral Midazolam-Ketamine Combination in Children

Aims

To compare nitrous oxide-oxygen inhalation and low dose oral midazolam-ketamine combination for anxiolysis in the management of children aged between 3 to 10 years for dental treatment.

Materials and methods

A comparative clinical study with equal number of subjects in both the groups evaluating efficacy of oral ketamine-midazolam combination and nitrous oxide-oxygen inhalation in children with Frankl behavior rating score 2 and ASA1.

A total of 30 children were equally divided into 2 groups, oral midazolam-ketamine (MK) group which received 0.25mg/ kg midazolam with 3mg/kg ketamine in combination and the Nitrous oxide-oxygen (N) group which received nitrous oxide-oxygen inhalation. The parameters evaluated were the drug/ mask acceptance, need for the use of a physical restraint. Houpt’s sedation scale, faces pain score, sedation duration, time taken to achieve the maximum sedation and adverse reactions were assessed. Student t-test was used for comparison between the groups and proportions were compared using Chi-square test.

Results

The results found no statistically significant differences between the groups in all the parameters except for the duration of sedation and the time taken to achieve maximum sedation which were higher in oral MK group than the Nitrous-oxide oxygen inhalation group.

Conclusion

Both oral-midazolam and ketamine combination and nitrous oxide-oxygen inhalation sedation were found to have similar clinical success among 3 to 10-year-old children in bringing about anxiolysis during dental treatment.

Clinical Significance

Both oral ketamine-midazolam combination, nitrous oxide-oxygen inhalation are equally effective for anxiolysis in children during dental treatment.

How to cite this article: Ilasrinivasan, Setty JV, Shyamachalam, Mendiretta P. A Comparative Evaluation of the Sedative Effects of Nitrous Oxide-oxygen Inhalation and Oral Midazolam-Ketamine Combination in Children. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent., 2018;11(5):399-405.

Comparison of sedative effects of oral midazolam/chloral hydrate and midazolam/promethazine in pediatric dentistry

Background. The aim of this investigation was to compare the sedative effects of oral midazolam/chloral hydrate and midazolam/promethazine combinations on fearful children needing dental treatment. Methods. This crossover double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 30 children aged 2‒6 years, who had at least two similar teeth needing pulp treatment. Standard vital signs were recorded before and after premedication. Wilson sedation scale was used to judge the level of sedation. Cases were divided into two groups based on the sequence of medication received. This was to overcome the sequence effect. Group I received oral midazolam (0.4 mg/kg/chloral hydrate (50 mg/kg) at the first visit while they received midazolam (0.4 mg/kg)/promethazine (5 mg/kg) in their second visit. Group II received the premedication in the opposite sequence. The operator and child were blinded to the medication administered. Sedative efficacy of the two combinations were assessed and judged by two independent pediatric dentists based on the Wilson scale. Data were analyzed with ANOVA and paired t-test. Results. Only 10% of children who received chloral hydrate with midazolam exhibited high improvement in their behavior while 53% showed reasonable positive changes and 12% had no change or even deterioration of behavior. The difference between the effect of the two combination drugs was statistically significant (P<0.05) in favor of the chloral hydrate group. Conclusion. The results showed a significant difference in the sedation level induced between the two groups. Midazolam/chloral hydrate combination more effectively improved the co-operation for dental treatment.

Comparison of nitrous oxide/midazolam and nitrous oxide/promethazine for pediatric dental sedation: A randomized, cross-over, clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study compared the safety and efficacy of nitrous oxide (N₂O)/midazolam and N₂O/promethazine for dental treatment of uncooperative children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized, cross-over, clinical trial investigation Eighteen healthy uncooperative children with a pair of similar teeth requiring the same treatment were included. Combination of N₂O/midazolam was given in one visit, where N₂O/promethazine was administrated in the other appointment for each patient in a cross-over manner. Oxygen saturation and heart rate as well as behavior parameters according to Houpt behavior scales were recorded. Postoperatively, patients' anxiety and parents' satisfaction were assessed by visual analog score and a questionnaire, respectively. Data were analyzed using Wilcoxon' s signed rank test and Paired t-tests with a P value set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Physiologic parameters were within normal limit in both groups. Children in midazolam group were significantly deeper sedated compared to other groups. In the first phase, children sedated with midazolam behaved superiorly in comparison to promethazine, while there was no difference at the final phase of the treatment between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Both of the drug combinations resulted in acceptable, efficient, and safe sedation outcomes.

Comparative evaluation of bispectral index system after sedation with midazolam and propofol combined with remifentanil versus ketamine in uncooperative during dental procedures

Background:

Proper analgesic agents should be used in combination with sedative agents. Remifentanil is a synthetic narcotic/analgesic agent with a short duration effect and decreases the risk of apnea during recovery. Bispectral index system (BIS) is a new noninvasive technique for the evaluation of the depth of sedation. The aim of present clinical trial was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of intravenous sedation with propofol/midazolam/remifentanil (PMR) in comparison to propofol/midazolam/ketamine (PMK) for dental procedures in children 3-7 years of age.

Materials and Methods:

In this clinical trial, 32 healthy uncooperative children who were candidates for dental treatments under sedation were randomly divided into two groups. Intravenous sedation was induced with PMR in one group and with PMK in the other group. After injection and during procedure BIS index, heart rate and respiratory rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation was evaluated every 5 min. After the procedure, recovery time was measured. Data were analyzed with ANOVA, Friedman, Wilcoxon, and t-test.

Results:

The BIS value was significantly low in ketamin group (P = 0.003) but respiratory rates and heart rates were same in both groups with no statistical difference (P = 0.884, P = 0.775). The recovery time was significantly shorter in remifentanil group (P = 0.008 and P = 0.003).

Conclusion:

It can be concluded that intravenous sedation technique with PMR combination induces effective and safe sedation, with less pain and more forgetfulness and a shorter recovery time for children 3-7 years of age during dental procedures.

Comparison of Oral and Intranasal Midazolam/Ketamine Sedation in 3-6-year-old Uncooperative Dental Patients

Background and aims. There are several known sedative drugs, with midazolam and ketamine being the most commonly used drugs in children. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of intranasal and oral midazolam plus ketamine in children with high levels of dental anxiety.

Materials and methods.A crossover double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 23 uncooperative children aged 3-6 (negative or definitely negative by Frankel scale), who required at least two similar dental treatment visits. Cases were randomly given ketamine (10 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) through oral or intranasal routes in each visit. The sedative efficacy of the agents was assessed by an overall success rate judged by two independent pediatric dentists based on Houpt’s scale for sedation. Data analysis was carried out using Wilcoxon test and paired t-test.

Results. Intranasal administration was more effective in reduction of crying and movement during dental procedures compared to oral sedation (P<0.05). Overall behavior control was scored higher in nasal compared to oral routes at the time of LA injection and after 15 minutes (P<0.05). The difference was found to be statistically significant at the start and during treatment. However, the difference was no longer significant after 30 minutes, with the vital signs remaining within physiological limits. Recovery time was longer in the intranasal group (P<0.001) with a more sleepy face (P=0.004).

Conclusion.. Intranasal midazolam/ketamine combination was more satisfactory and effective than the oral route when sedating uncooperative children.

The Efficacy of Two Intravenous Sedative Drugs in Management of Uncooperative Children for Dental Treatments

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Some children do not show an appropriate cooperation with their dentist. A number of them cannot be managed by local anesthesia and the usual techniques used to control behaviors, so further steps are required to control their pain and anxiety. Pharmaceutical control is recommended through sedation or general anesthesia.

PURPOSE

This study was aimed to evaluate two groups of drugs in intravenous sedation method.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

In this clinical trial intervention study, patients were randomly divided into two groups of 18 and 20 and each group received either intravenous midazolam-ketamine or midazolam-fentanyl. During the procedure, 0.25mg midazolam was administered to both groups if needed. The scores of intraoperative sedation and operation conditions were evaluated and recorded by dental sedation teacher groups (DSTG) system in the 10(th), 20(th), 30(th) and 40(th) minutes of the operation. The results were analyzed by SPSS (version 16) using independent T-test, Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney and Pearson Chi-Square tests as appropriated.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the two groups in sedation period (p= 0.55), recovery time (p= 0.18), Frankl score (p= 0.83(, score of intraoperative sedation and operating conditions (p> 0.05), and sedation complications (p= 0.612). In addition, no complication occurred in recovery.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between the two drug groups; both were appropriate in controlling children's behavior.

Effectiveness of oral ketamine, midazolam, and atropine cocktail versus oral diphenhydramine for pediatric sedation in the emergency department

Background:

Sedation is a condition of reduced level of consciousness (LOC) for a patient that is created to decrease irritability, anxiety, and restlessness.

Objectives:

In this study, we compared the sedative effect of oral administration of ketamine, midazolam, and atropine cocktail with diphenhydramine in the referent children to the emergency department.

Patients and Methods:

Based on the double-blind randomized clinical trial in this investigation, 80 children, who needed to repair their wounds with suture were randomly divided into two groups: group 1 and group 2, who have received oral diphenhydramine and oral ketamine, midazolam, and atropine cocktail, respectively. Behavioral changes were collected and recorded before, during intervention and two weeks after intervention. Statistical data were analyzed by SPSS-16 software and chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests were employed to study the relations among variables. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

There was no significant difference between two groups in terms of drug acceptance and anxiety degree in children before intervention. Group 2 had achieved better and deeper sedation than group 1 during 45-minute post-medication (P < 0.05, P = 0.01). Regarding pediatric general behavior such as crying or interruptive moves, there was also a significant statistical difference between group 2 and group 1 (P = 0.009) based on Houpt Classification. The mean recovery times in groups 1 and 2 were 34.37 ± 14.23 min and 27.25 ± 5.14 min, respectively (P = 0.003). In terms of behavioral changes, the rate of cumulative frequency was computed for behavioral changes two weeks after the discharge from emergency department in which there were less behavioral changes in group 2 than in group 1 (P = 0.04).

Conclusions:

Oral administration of ketamine, midazolam, and atropine cocktail induces better sedation than diphenhydramine with respect to its limited mood changes in children, who need a medical procedure at emergency department.

Pain and anxiety management for pediatric dental procedures using various combinations of sedative drugs: A review

For fearful and uncooperative children behavioral management techniques are used. In order to control the pain and anxiety in pedodontic patients, pharmacologic sedation, anesthesia and analgesia are commonly used. Midazolam is commonly used as an oral sedation agent in children; it has several features such as safety of use, quick onset and certain degree of amnesia that makes it a desirable sedation agent in children. This review paper discusses various aspects of oral midazolam, ketamine and their combinations in conscious sedation including, advantages of oral route of sedation, pharmacokinetics, range of oral doses, and antagonists for clinical dental treatment procedures.

Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients

BACKGROUND

THE GOAL OF THIS INVESTIGATION WAS TO COMPARE THE BEHAVIORAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF THREE SEDATIVE DRUG REGIMENS: oral meperidine (OM), submucosal meperidine (SM) and oral midazolam (M) in healthy pediatric patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study sample consisted of thirty children aged 24-72 months (mean = 41.1) exhibiting definitely negative behavior. Three sedative regimens including: Oral meperidine/hydroxyzine, oral midazolam/hydroxyzine and submucosal meperidine/oral hydroxyzine were administered randomly during three consecutive appointments with a crossover design. Houpt behavioral scale was employed for evaluating the sedation effect of each regimen by a calibrated independent Pediatric dentist. Physiologic parameters were also recorded including blood oxygen saturation and pulse rate. Data was analyzed using Wilcoxon-signed ranked test, Mc-Nemar, GEE Logistic regression, Friedman, Fisher exact and Cochran tests for significance.

RESULTS

Overall success rates were 50%, 46.7% and 26.7% for submucosal meperidine, oral meperidine and oral midazolam, respectively (P = 0.03). The probability of achieving a success in behavior control was more in 48-72 month olds. Child's age and drug type were the two main predictors of altered behavior. Evaluating the differences between the effects of three tested regimens on recorded physiological parameters showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

All three regimens were proved safe within the limits of the current study. Meperidine sedation in both routes was considered to be more effective. Although there was less sleep and more head/oral resistance in midazolam group, the difference between groups was not significant.