Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24910681›Full record

ArticleJournal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran)2014

Sedative Effect of Oral Midazolam/Hydroxyzine versus Chloral Hydrate/Hydroxyzine on 2-6 Year-Old Uncooperative Dental Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Masoud Fallahinejad Ghajari, Mojtaba Vahid Golpayegani, Majid Bargrizan, Ghassem Ansari, Shahnaz Shayeghi

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Masoud Fallahinejad GhajariAssociate Professor, Dental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mojtaba Vahid GolpayeganiProfessor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University of medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Majid BargrizanAssociate Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University of medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Ghassem AnsariProfessor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University of medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Shahnaz ShayeghiAssosiate Professor, Department of Anesthesia, Medical Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University of medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDifferent drugs are used for conscious sedation in pediatric dentistry either single or in combination. This study assessed the comparative effect of midazolam/hydroxyzine and chloral hydrate/hydroxyzine on 2-6 year-old uncooperative children needing dental treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsA double blind cross-over randomized clinical trial was designed and 16 children aged 2-6 years with ASA1 status who were judged with negative to definitely negative behavior (according to Frankl) were chosen. Cases were divided randomly into two groups. The first group received midazolam/hydroxyzine (MH) at the first visit while the second group received chloral hydrate/hydroxyzine (CHH) as the first medication. Both groups received the other regimen at the second visit. Midazolam 0.5mg/kg and chloral hydrate 50mg/kg with 1mg/kg hydroxyzine were administered. Cases were subsequently assessed for sedation and then dental treatment was performed. Blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) and pulse rate (PR) were measured before and after drug administration, as well as during and after dental treatment. The Houpt scale was also used for the level of sedation before, during and after treatment. Data were analyzed using Wilcox-on signed rank test and the paired t-test.

resultsSedative success rate was 64.3% in cases of MH and 33.3% in CHH. The difference between groups was significant (P=0.046). The success rate was significantly different between groups at different measurement stages as well (P<0.05). No difference was found on the child's behavior scale based on the type of drugs used first; this indicates no carry-over effect. Comparing the PR and SpO2 values at different readings showed no significant differences.

conclusionMidazolam/hydroxyzine showed a significantly higher sedative effect than chloral hydrate/hydroxyzine in this study.

Indexed as

Conscious sedationDental treatmentHydroxyzineMidazolam, Chloral HydrateUncooperative child

Identifiers

PMID24910681
PMCPMC4037271
OpenAlexW2188362902

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.