ReviewThe Japanese dental science review2017
Muscle power during intravenous sedation.
Review in The Japanese dental science review, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Anesthetic Features in Diazepam and Midazolam for Sedation Dentistry: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Propofol binds and inhibits skeletal muscle ryanodine receptor 1.British journal of anaesthesia · 2024Article
- CPR-Induced Consciousness during Ventricular Fibrillation: Case Report and Literature Review.Emergency medicine international · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intravenous sedation is effective to reduce fear and anxiety in dental treatment. It also has been used for behavior modification technique in dental patients with special needs. Midazolam and propofol are commonly used for intravenous sedation. Although there have been many researches on the effects of midazolam and propofol on vital function and the recovery profile, little is known about muscle power. This review discusses the effects of intravenous sedation using midazolam and propofol on both grip strength and bite force. During light propofol sedation, grip strength increases slightly and bite force increases in a dose-dependent manner. Grip strength decreases while bite force increases during light midazolam sedation, and also during light sedation using a combination of midazolam and propofol. Flumazenil did not antagonise the increase in bite force by midazolam. These results may suggest following possibilities; (1) Activation of peripheral benzodiazepine receptors located within the temporomandibular joint region and masticatory muscles may be the cause of increasing bite force. (2) Propofol limited the long-latency exteroceptive suppression (ES2) period during jaw-opening reflex. Thus, control of masticatory muscle contraction, which is thought to have a negative feedback effect on excessive bite force, may be depressed by propofol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.