Comparative evaluation of intranasal dexmedetomidine, intranasal midazolam, and nitrous oxide for conscious sedation of anxious children undergoing dental treatment: A randomized cross-over trial.

Palak Janiani, Deepa Gurunathan, Ramsesh Manohar
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of intranasal dexmedetomidine, intranasal midazolam, and nitrous oxide for conscious sedation of anxious children undergoing dental treatment: A randomized cross-over trial.","authors":"Palak Janiani, Deepa Gurunathan, Ramsesh Manohar","doi":"10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_104_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pharmacological methods, specifically sedatives, have gained popularity in managing the behavior of children during dental appointments.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare 1 m/kg intranasal dexmedetomidine, 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam, and nitrous oxide in evaluating the level of sedation, behavior of the child, onset of sedation, physiologic signs, and adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this cross-over trial, 15 children aged 6-8 years were randomized to receive intranasal atomized dexmedetomidine, intranasal atomized midazolam, and inhalation nitrous oxide at three separate visits. After administering the sedative agent, a single pulpectomy was performed during each appointment, and the outcomes were recorded. The washout period between each visit was 1 week.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All three sedative agents were equally effective in controlling overall behavior. Dexmedetomidine showed lower sedation level scores (agitated; score 9) than the other groups. There was a statistically significant difference in the onset of sedation, with dexmedetomidine having the longest onset of 36.2 ± 9.47 min. Coughing and sneezing were predominantly observed after administration of intranasal midazolam. Oxygen saturation levels were statistically lower in the intranasal midazolam group during local anesthesia administration and post-treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam is as effective as nitrous oxide sedation for controlling behavior and providing adequate sedation in pediatric dental patients. However, 1 m/kg dexmedetomidine did not provide the same level of sedation and had a significantly longer onset. 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam is an effective alternative to nitrous oxide sedation in anxious children.</p>","PeriodicalId":101311,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry","volume":"42 2","pages":"141-148"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_104_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pharmacological methods, specifically sedatives, have gained popularity in managing the behavior of children during dental appointments.

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare 1 m/kg intranasal dexmedetomidine, 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam, and nitrous oxide in evaluating the level of sedation, behavior of the child, onset of sedation, physiologic signs, and adverse effects.

Materials and methods: In this cross-over trial, 15 children aged 6-8 years were randomized to receive intranasal atomized dexmedetomidine, intranasal atomized midazolam, and inhalation nitrous oxide at three separate visits. After administering the sedative agent, a single pulpectomy was performed during each appointment, and the outcomes were recorded. The washout period between each visit was 1 week.

Results: All three sedative agents were equally effective in controlling overall behavior. Dexmedetomidine showed lower sedation level scores (agitated; score 9) than the other groups. There was a statistically significant difference in the onset of sedation, with dexmedetomidine having the longest onset of 36.2 ± 9.47 min. Coughing and sneezing were predominantly observed after administration of intranasal midazolam. Oxygen saturation levels were statistically lower in the intranasal midazolam group during local anesthesia administration and post-treatment.

Conclusion: 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam is as effective as nitrous oxide sedation for controlling behavior and providing adequate sedation in pediatric dental patients. However, 1 m/kg dexmedetomidine did not provide the same level of sedation and had a significantly longer onset. 0.3 mg/kg intranasal midazolam is an effective alternative to nitrous oxide sedation in anxious children.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
鼻内右美托咪定、鼻内咪达唑仑和氧化亚氮对接受牙科治疗的焦虑儿童进行有意识镇静的比较评估:随机交叉试验
背景:目的:本研究旨在比较 1 m/kg 雾化右美托咪定、0.3 mg/kg 雾化咪达唑仑和氧化亚氮在评估镇静程度、儿童行为、镇静开始时间、生理体征和不良反应方面的作用:在这项交叉试验中,15 名 6-8 岁的儿童被随机分为三组,分别接受雾化右美托咪定、雾化咪达唑仑和吸入氧化亚氮治疗。使用镇静剂后,在每次就诊时进行一次肺部切除术,并记录结果。每次就诊之间的冲洗期为 1 周:所有三种镇静剂在控制总体行为方面都同样有效。右美托咪定的镇静水平评分(躁动;评分 9)低于其他组。镇静起效时间的差异有统计学意义,右美托咪定的起效时间最长,为 36.2 ± 9.47 分钟。鼻内咪达唑仑给药后主要出现咳嗽和打喷嚏。结论:0.3 毫克/千克咪达唑仑鼻内镇静剂与氧化亚氮镇静剂一样能有效控制儿童牙科患者的行为并提供充分的镇静。然而,1 毫克/千克右美托咪定不能提供相同程度的镇静效果,而且起效时间明显更长。对于焦虑的儿童来说,0.3 毫克/千克鼻内咪达唑仑是氧化亚氮镇静剂的有效替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Facial shape and Baume's molar relation: An observational study in preschool children. Tongue strength and endurance in relation to oral cavity morphology among children with Down syndrome in the permanent dentition period. The Pygmalion Effect. Knowledge, practice, and experience of regenerative endodontic therapy among pediatric dentists and postgraduate students in India. Oral health inequities among children with intellectual disabilities: Findings from special olympics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1