Comparison of intranasal ketamine with intranasal midazolam and dexmedetomidine combination in pediatric dental patients for procedural sedation: A crossover study.

Bibhav Dubey, Neerja Singh, Santosh Kumar
{"title":"Comparison of intranasal ketamine with intranasal midazolam and dexmedetomidine combination in pediatric dental patients for procedural sedation: A crossover study.","authors":"Bibhav Dubey, Neerja Singh, Santosh Kumar","doi":"10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_153_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The main goal of the pediatric dentist is to address and reduce children's fear and anxiety during the dental treatment, especially when conventional behavior-guiding strategies fail. In such cases, the use of pharmacological agents becomes an essential factor to consider.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of intranasal ketamine (INK) with the combination of intranasal midazolam and dexmedetomidine (INMzD) in pediatric dental patients for the procedural sedation.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Forty-seven children aged 3-9 years who required dental procedures such as extractions, pulpectomy, and restorations were randomly distributed into two groups using the envelope drawing method. Group INK received 7 mg/kg INK, whereas Group INMzD received a combination of midazolam spray (0.3 mg/kg) and atomized dexmedetomidine (3 μg/kg).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>INK showed faster onset, faster recovery, and shorter discharge time than INMzD. Both groups had acceptable physiological parameters and no postoperative complications. INK was more accepted by the patients than INMzD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In terms of efficacy, safety, and acceptability, INK outperformed the combination of INMzD for the procedural sedation.</p>","PeriodicalId":101311,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry","volume":"42 3","pages":"217-225"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","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_153_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The main goal of the pediatric dentist is to address and reduce children's fear and anxiety during the dental treatment, especially when conventional behavior-guiding strategies fail. In such cases, the use of pharmacological agents becomes an essential factor to consider.

Objective: The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of intranasal ketamine (INK) with the combination of intranasal midazolam and dexmedetomidine (INMzD) in pediatric dental patients for the procedural sedation.

Patients and methods: Forty-seven children aged 3-9 years who required dental procedures such as extractions, pulpectomy, and restorations were randomly distributed into two groups using the envelope drawing method. Group INK received 7 mg/kg INK, whereas Group INMzD received a combination of midazolam spray (0.3 mg/kg) and atomized dexmedetomidine (3 μg/kg).

Results: INK showed faster onset, faster recovery, and shorter discharge time than INMzD. Both groups had acceptable physiological parameters and no postoperative complications. INK was more accepted by the patients than INMzD.

Conclusions: In terms of efficacy, safety, and acceptability, INK outperformed the combination of INMzD for the procedural sedation.

比较氯胺酮与咪达唑仑和右美托咪定复方制剂在儿童牙科患者手术镇静中的应用:一项交叉研究。
背景:儿童牙医的主要目标是解决和减少儿童在牙科治疗过程中的恐惧和焦虑,尤其是当传统的行为引导策略失败时。在这种情况下,使用药理制剂成为一个必须考虑的因素:本研究旨在比较鼻内氯胺酮(INK)与鼻内咪达唑仑和右美托咪定(INMzD)联合用于儿童牙科患者程序性镇静的有效性、安全性和可接受性:采用信封抽签法将需要进行拔牙、腭裂切除术和修复术等牙科手术的 47 名 3-9 岁儿童随机分为两组。INK 组接受 7 毫克/千克的 INK,而 INMzD 组则接受咪达唑仑喷雾剂(0.3 毫克/千克)和雾化右美托咪定(3 微克/千克)的组合:与 INMzD 相比,INK 起效更快,恢复更快,出院时间更短。两组患者的生理指标均可接受,且无术后并发症。INK比INMzD更容易被患者接受:就疗效、安全性和可接受性而言,INK 在手术镇静方面优于 INMzD 组合。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信