Sedative and behavioral effects of atomized intranasal midazolam in comparison with nebulized midazolam for children undergoing dental treatment: A randomized clinical trial

IF 2.3 3区医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

International journal of paediatric dentistry Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1111/ipd.13261

Amira Abdelhafeez Elkhatib, Yousr Nader Mowafy, Tamer A. M. Ghoneim

{"title":"Sedative and behavioral effects of atomized intranasal midazolam in comparison with nebulized midazolam for children undergoing dental treatment: A randomized clinical trial","authors":"Amira Abdelhafeez Elkhatib, Yousr Nader Mowafy, Tamer A. M. Ghoneim","doi":"10.1111/ipd.13261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundFear and anxiet are significant barriers of dental care in children. Sedation emerged as a valuable behaviour guidance technique to manage uncooperative children.AimTo evaluate the sedative and behavioral effectiveness of midazolam administered via nebulizer in comparison with intranasal atomizer in the behavior management of anxious children during dental treatment.Study DesignTwo‐arm randomized clinical trial with 68 children (3–5 years) assigned to receive nebulized midazolam (NEB MDZ) and atomized intranasal midazolam (AIN MDZ) during dental treatment. The onset time, sedation levels, and behavior of children were documented. The data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test and Mann–Whitney U tests.ResultsSignificant differences between the two groups in terms of onset time, sedation level, and behavior of children during the dental treatment. AIN MDZ was associated with a significantly faster onset time compared with NEB MD, (p < .001). Children who received NEB MDZ exhibited deeper levels of sedation compared with AIN MDZ group (p = .02). During the administration of local anesthesia, notable statistical differences were observed between the behavior of the two groups (p = .02).ConclusionsMidazolam administered via either nebulizer or intranasal atomizer was the effective route of administration and proved effective in the management of anxious children undergoing dental treatment. AIN MDZ, however, exhibited a faster onset time, whereas children receiving NEB MDZ demonstrated superior behavior compared with those receiving AIN MDZ.","PeriodicalId":14268,"journal":{"name":"International journal of paediatric dentistry","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of paediatric dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.13261","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundFear and anxiet are significant barriers of dental care in children. Sedation emerged as a valuable behaviour guidance technique to manage uncooperative children.AimTo evaluate the sedative and behavioral effectiveness of midazolam administered via nebulizer in comparison with intranasal atomizer in the behavior management of anxious children during dental treatment.Study DesignTwo‐arm randomized clinical trial with 68 children (3–5 years) assigned to receive nebulized midazolam (NEB MDZ) and atomized intranasal midazolam (AIN MDZ) during dental treatment. The onset time, sedation levels, and behavior of children were documented. The data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test and Mann–Whitney U tests.ResultsSignificant differences between the two groups in terms of onset time, sedation level, and behavior of children during the dental treatment. AIN MDZ was associated with a significantly faster onset time compared with NEB MD, (p < .001). Children who received NEB MDZ exhibited deeper levels of sedation compared with AIN MDZ group (p = .02). During the administration of local anesthesia, notable statistical differences were observed between the behavior of the two groups (p = .02).ConclusionsMidazolam administered via either nebulizer or intranasal atomizer was the effective route of administration and proved effective in the management of anxious children undergoing dental treatment. AIN MDZ, however, exhibited a faster onset time, whereas children receiving NEB MDZ demonstrated superior behavior compared with those receiving AIN MDZ.

查看原文本刊更多论文

雾化咪达唑仑与雾化咪达唑仑对接受牙科治疗的儿童的镇静和行为效果比较：随机临床试验

背景恐惧和焦虑是儿童接受牙科治疗的主要障碍。研究设计双臂随机临床试验，68 名儿童（3-5 岁）在牙科治疗期间被分配接受雾化咪达唑仑（NEB MDZ）和雾化咪达唑仑（AIN MDZ）治疗。儿童的起效时间、镇静水平和行为均被记录在案。采用 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验和 Mann-Whitney U 检验对数据进行分析。结果两组儿童在牙科治疗中的起效时间、镇静水平和行为均有显著差异。与 NEB MD 相比，AIN MDZ 的起效时间明显更快（p < .001）。与 AIN MDZ 组相比，接受 NEB MDZ 的儿童表现出更深的镇静水平（p = .02）。结论通过雾化器或鼻内雾化器给药的咪达唑仑是有效的给药途径，并被证明能有效控制接受牙科治疗的焦虑儿童。然而，AIN MDZ 的起效时间更快，而与接受 AIN MDZ 的儿童相比，接受 NEB MDZ 的儿童表现更佳。

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

International journal of paediatric dentistry 医学-小儿科

CiteScore

5.50

自引率

2.60%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry was formed in 1991 by the merger of the Journals of the International Association of Paediatric Dentistry and the British Society of Paediatric Dentistry and is published bi-monthly. It has true international scope and aims to promote the highest standard of education, practice and research in paediatric dentistry world-wide. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry publishes papers on all aspects of paediatric dentistry including: growth and development, behaviour management, diagnosis, prevention, restorative treatment and issue relating to medically compromised children or those with disabilities. This peer-reviewed journal features scientific articles, reviews, case reports, clinical techniques, short communications and abstracts of current paediatric dental research. Analytical studies with a scientific novelty value are preferred to descriptive studies. Case reports illustrating unusual conditions and clinically relevant observations are acceptable but must be of sufficiently high quality to be considered for publication; particularly the illustrative material must be of the highest quality.