ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2022
Effect of adding midazolam to intrathecal bupivacaine in children undergoing lower abdominal surgeries: A randomised controlled trial.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2022. 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.
- Efficacy and safety of midazolam compared to fentanyl as adjuvants to hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
- Risk of bias in published randomised controlled trials.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Trends in research inIndian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Segmental Thoracic Spinal Anesthesia for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy with the "Hypobaric" Technique: A Case Series.Local and regional anesthesia · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Avoidance of general anaesthesia for short-duration surgeries is a prerequisite, especially for children. Spinal anaesthesia is established as an appropriate anaesthetic procedure for this target. Midazolam has been proven to be safe for children as premedication. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of adding midazolam to intrathecal bupivacaine on intraoperative quality, duration of spinal anaesthesia and postoperative (PO) analgesia for children undergoing lower abdominal surgeries. Methods: A prospective, comparative interventional study included 120 paediatric patients who were randomly divided into two groups that received intrathecal bupivacaine plus normal saline (B/S) or intrathecal bupivacaine plus midazolam (B/M). The efficacy of PO analgesia was assessed using the observational pain-discomfort scale (OPS). Duration of PO analgesia was measured, and recovery of motor block was assessed every 30 min till the Bromage scale reached 0. The level of PO sedation was assessed using the modified Wilson Sedation Score (WSS). Results were analysed using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, Mann-Whitney test and Chi-square test. Results: Onset of sensory and motor blocks was significantly faster, and the frequency of patients having Bromage score of 3 within ≤10 min was significantly higher in group B/M than group B/S. Durations till sensory and motor recovery were significantly longer, the number of requests for PO analgesia was significantly lower and the mean of WSS was significantly higher at 30 and 120 min in group B/M than group B/S. Conclusion: Intrathecal bupivacaine-midazolam combination significantly prolonged the duration of spinal anaesthesia and provided prolonged PO analgesia.
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.