ArticleJournal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran)2018
Intranasal Premedication Effect of Dexmedetomidine Versus Midazolam on the Behavior of 2-6-Year-Old Uncooperative Children in Dental Clinic.
Article in Journal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of dexmedetomidine to midazolam as premedication and a sedative agent in pediatric patients undergoing dental procedures.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness and acceptance of intranasal dexmedetomidine and intranasal midazolam for sedation in children aged 5-8 years using a mucosal atomizer device: a randomized controlled clinical study.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Article
- The implementation of conscious sedation by dental professionals in Egypt: an analytical cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Nasal Sedation Midazolam Compared with Dexmedetomidine in the Management of Uncooperative Children with Down Syndrome during Dental Treatment.International journal of dentistry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the intranasal premedication effect of newly introduced dexmedetomidine (DEX) versus midazolam on the behavior of uncooperative children in the dental clinic. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis crossover double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 20 uncooperative children aged 2-6 years who required at least two similar dental treatment visits. The subjects were randomly given 1 μg/kg of DEX and 0.5 mg/kg of midazolam via the intranasal route. For the sedation protocol in the two groups, 0.25 mg/kg of atropine in combination with 0.5 mg/kg of midazolam added to 1-2 mg/kg of ketamine were used 30 minutes after premedication and transferring the patient to the operating room. Dental treatments were carried out by a pediatric dentist blinded to the type of the administered premedication. The sedative efficacy (overall success rate) of the agents was assessed by two independent pediatric dentists based on the Houpt scale. Data analyses were carried out according to Wilcoxon signed-rank test and paired t-test.
resultsThere were no significant differences in the premedication efficacy of intranasal DEX and midazolam according to the Houpt scale (P>0.05).
conclusionsIntranasal midazolam and DEX are satisfactory and effective premedication regimens for uncooperative children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29971125PMC6026311W2788623100What 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.