Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27928238›Full record

ArticleJournal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran)2016

Conscious Sedation Efficacy of 0.3 and 0.5 mg/kg Oral Midazolam for Three to Six Year-Old Uncooperative Children Undergoing Dental Treatment: A Clinical Trial.

Masoud Fallahinejad Ghajari, Ghassem Ansari, Leila Hasanbeygi, Shahnaz Shayeghi

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy of Midazolam in Outpatient Pediatric Dentistry: A Systematic Review.Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Oral sedation in dentistry: evaluation of professional practice of oral hydroxyzine in the University Hospital of Rennes, France.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Masoud Fallahinejad GhajariProfessor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ghassem AnsariProfessor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Leila HasanbeygiResident of Pediatric Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Shahnaz ShayeghiAssociate Professor, Department of Anesthesia, Medical School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRIsfahan University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMidazolam with variable dosages has been used to induce sedation in pediatric dentistry. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two dosages of oral midazolam for conscious sedation of children undergoing dental treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this randomized crossover double blind clinical trial, 20 healthy children (ASA I) aged three to six years with definitely negative Frankl behavioral rating scale were evaluated. Half of the children received 0.5mg/kg oral midazolam plus 1mg/kg hydroxyzine (A) orally in the first session and 0.3mg/kg oral midazolam plus 1mg/kg hydroxyzine (B) in the next session. The other half received the drugs on a reverse order. Sedation degree by Houpt sedation rating scale, heart rate and level of SpO2 were assessed at the beginning and after 15 and 30 minutes. The data were analyzed using SPSS 19 and Wilcoxon Signed Rank and McNemar's tests.

resultsThe results showed that although administration of 0.5mg/kg oral midazolam was slightly superior to 0.3mg/kg oral midazolam in terms of sedation efficacy, the differences were not significant (P>0.05). The difference in treatment success was not significant either (P>0.05). Heart rate, oxygen saturation (SpO2) and respiratory rate were within the normal range and did not show a significant change (P>0.05).

conclusionsThe overall success rate of the two drug combinations namely 0.5mg/kg oral midazolam plus hydroxyzine and 0.3mg/kg oral midazolam plus hydroxyzine was not significantly different for management of pediatric patients.

Indexed as

Conscious SedationHydroxyzineMidazolamPediatric Dentistry

Identifiers

PMID27928238
PMCPMC5139927
OpenAlexW2525518560

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.