A randomized, clinical trial of oral midazolam plus placebo versus oral midazolam plus oral transmucosal fentanyl for sedation during laceration repair

被引:30
|
作者
Klein, EJ
Diekema, DS
Paris, CA
Quan, L
Cohen, M
Seidel, KD
机构
[1] Childrens Hosp & Med Ctr, Invest Drug Serv, Seattle, WA 98105 USA
[2] Univ Washington, Dept Pediat, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[3] Univ Washington, Gen Clin Res Ctr, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
关键词
sedation; Fentanyl Oralet; midazolam;
D O I
10.1542/peds.109.5.894
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Objective. To determine whether a combination of oral transmucosal fentanyl (Fentanyl Oralet, Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, IL) plus oral midazolam has an acceptable safety profile and is more effective than oral midazolam alone for sedation during laceration repair in a pediatric emergency department (ED). Methods. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Patients between 2 and 8 years of age who weighed >10 kg and presented to the ED with a laceration in need of repair under sedation were eligible for inclusion. All patients received oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg; maximum dose 10 mg) and either fentanyl (5-10 mug/kg) or placebo in oralet form. Data collected every 5 minutes included the following: heart rate, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, pain as measured on a Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Score (CHEOPS) scale (range: 4-13), and an activity scale (range: 1-5). Effectiveness of sedation was measured by CHEOPS and activity scores compared between the treatment groups. Results. Fifty-one patients were randomized to receive oral midazolam plus fentanyl (N = 28) or oral midazolam plus placebo (N = 23). Age, weight, gender, or baseline pain and activity scores did not differ between the 2 groups. Seven patients in the fentanyl group vomited compared with 0 patients in the placebo group. Three patients in the fentanyl group and no patients in the placebo group had brief oxygen saturation below 93% on room air. The mean pain score within 5 minutes of the start of the procedure did not differ between the 2 groups (fentanyl group, 9.4 versus placebo group, 8.8). Mean activity scores within 5 minutes of the start of the procedure were also similar (fentanyl group, 4.3 versus placebo group, 4.3). Conclusions. The addition of oral transmucosal fentanyl to oral midazolam did not improve pain or activity scores in pediatric patients given sedation for laceration repair. Patients who received Fentanyl Oralet suffered significantly more side effects despite the relatively low doses administered in this study. Oral transmucosal fentanyl should not be used for procedural sedation in the ED.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:894 / 897
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] MIDAZOLAM INDUCED AMNESIA DURING SEDATION FOR ORAL-SURGERY
    HUPP, JR
    BECKER, LE
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1987, 66 : 338 - 338
  • [32] Comparison of oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate and intramuscular meperidine, promethazine, and chlorpromazine for conscious sedation of children undergoing laceration repair
    Schutzman, SA
    Liebelt, E
    Wisk, M
    Burg, J
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1996, 28 (04) : 385 - 390
  • [33] Balanced Propofol Sedation Versus Fentanyl and Midazolam Titrated to Moderate Sedation for EGD: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial
    Levitzky, Benjamin
    Lopez, Rocio
    Dumot, John A.
    Vargo, John J.
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2009, 69 (05) : AB103 - AB103
  • [34] Sedation During EGD in Cirrhotic Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Propofol and Fentanyl Versus Midazolam and Fentanyl
    Correia, Lucianna M.
    Queiroz, Danielle
    Lenz, Luciano
    Tafarel, Jean
    Gomes, Gustavo F.
    Martins, Fernanda P.
    Nakao, Frank S.
    Rodrigues, Rodrigo A.
    Rohr, Maria Rachel S.
    Ferrari, Angelo P.
    Libera, Ermelindo D.
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2009, 69 (05) : AB211 - AB211
  • [35] Microstream capnography during conscious sedation with midazolam for oral surgery: a randomised controlled trial
    Paul Brady
    Gabriella Iohom
    Ken D O’Halloran
    Christine McCreary
    Michael Cronin
    BDJ Open, 3 (1)
  • [36] RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL OF MIDAZOLAM PLACEBO AND MIDAZOLAM FENTANYL FOR SEDATION AND ANALGESIA IN LOWER-EXTREMITY ANGIOGRAPHY
    CRAGG, AH
    SMITH, TP
    BERBAUM, KS
    NAKAGAWA, N
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1991, 157 (01) : 173 - 176
  • [37] BIS monitoring during midazolam and midazolam-ketamine conscious intravenous sedation for oral surgery
    Morse, Z
    Kaizu, M
    Sano, K
    Kanri, T
    ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 2002, 94 (04): : 420 - 424
  • [38] Propofol versus midazolam plus meperidine for sedation during ambulatory esophagogastroduodenoscopy
    Khoshoo, V
    Thoppil, D
    Landry, L
    Brown, S
    Ross, G
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 2003, 37 (02): : 146 - 149
  • [39] A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Oral, Aerosolized Intranasal, and Aerosolized Buccal Midazolam
    Klein, Eileen J.
    Brown, Julie C.
    Kobayashi, Ana
    Osincup, Daniel
    Seidel, Kristy
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2011, 58 (04) : 323 - 329
  • [40] Improved sedation for oral surgery by combining nitrous oxide and intravenous midazolam: a randomized, controlled trial
    Venchard, G. R.
    Thomson, P. J.
    Boys, R.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2006, 35 (06) : 522 - 527