首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Archives of Emergency Medicine >Intravenous ketamine plus midazolam is superior to intranasal midazolam for emergency paediatric procedural sedation
【2h】

Intravenous ketamine plus midazolam is superior to intranasal midazolam for emergency paediatric procedural sedation

机译:静脉氯胺酮加咪达唑仑在紧急儿科手术镇静中优于鼻腔咪达唑仑

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objectives—This study compared intranasal midazolam (INM) with a combination of intravenous ketamine and intravenous midazolam (IVKM) for sedation of children requiring minor procedures in the emergency department. Method—A single blinded randomised clinical trial was conducted in the emergency department of a major urban paediatric hospital. Subjects requiring sedation for minor procedures were randomised to receive either INM (0.4 mg/kg) or intravenous ketamine (1 mg/kg) plus intravenous midazolam (0.1 mg/kg). Physiological variables and two independent measures of sedation (Sedation Score and Visual Analogue Sedation Scale) were recorded before sedation and at regular intervals during the procedure and recovery period. Times to adequate level of sedation and to discharge were compared. Results—Fifty three patients were enrolled over a 10 month period. Sedation was sufficient to complete the procedures in all children receiving IVKM and in 24 of the 26 receiving INM. Onset of sedation was an average of 5.3 minutes quicker with IVKM than with INM (95%CI 3.2, 7.4 minutes, p<0.001). Children given INM were discharged an average of 19 minutes earlier than those given IVKM (95%CI 4, 33 minutes, p=0.02). Mean Sedation Scores and Visual Analogue Sedation Scale scores for the 30 minutes after drug administration were significantly better in children given IVKM compared with INM (2.4 and 1.8 versus 3.5 and 3.8, respectively). Both doctors and parents were more satisfied with sedation by intravenous ketamine and midazolam. Conclusions—Intravenous ketamine plus midazolam used in an appropriate setting by experienced personnel provides an excellent means of achieving sedation suitable for most non-painful minor procedures for children in the emergency department. This combination is superior to INM in terms of speed of onset and consistency of effect. INM delivered via aerosol spray has a more variable effect but may still be adequate for the completion of many of these procedures.
机译:目的—本研究比较了鼻内咪达唑仑(INM)与静脉内氯胺酮和静脉内咪达唑仑(IVKM)的结合,以对急诊科中需要进行小手术的儿童镇静。方法-在一家大型城市儿科医院的急诊室进行了一项单盲随机临床试验。需要进行小规模镇静的受试者被随机分配接受INM(0.4 mg / kg)或静脉氯胺酮(1 mg / kg)加静脉给予咪达唑仑(0.1 mg / kg)。镇静前和镇静过程中及恢复期间定期记录生理变量和镇静的两个独立测量指标(镇静分数和视觉模拟镇静量表)。比较达到镇静和出院的时间。结果-在10个月内招募了53名患者。镇静足以完成所有接受IVKM的儿童和接受INM的26名儿童中的24名。 IVKM的镇静作用平均比INM快5.3分钟(95%CI 3.2,7.4分钟,p <0.001)。接受INM治疗的儿童平均比接受IVKM治疗的儿童早出19分钟(95%CI 4,33分钟,p = 0.02)。给予IVKM的儿童在服药后30分钟内的平均镇静分数和视觉模拟镇静量表分数比INM显着更好(分别为2.4和1.8、3.5和3.8)。医生和父母都对静脉内氯胺酮和咪达唑仑镇静感到满意。结论-由经验丰富的人员在适当的环境中使用氯胺酮+咪达唑仑可为急诊科的大多数非疼痛性小手术患者提供镇静的绝佳方法。在起效速度和效果一致性方面,这种组合优于INM。通过气溶胶喷雾递送的INM效果更差,但可能仍足以完成许多这样的过程。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号