ReviewInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry
Comparing the Sedative Effect of Oral and Intranasal Midazolam and their Effect on Behavior in Pediatric Dental Patients.
Review in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of Temperament on the Acceptance of Two Conscious Sedation Techniques in Toddlers Undergoing Dental Treatment: A Randomised Cross Over Trial.Pain research & management · 2023Trial
- Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews on Pediatric Sedation in Dentistry: An Umbrella Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Assessment of Pain During Pediatric Dental Treatment Using Different Sedative Agents: A Crossover Trial.Cureus · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To systematically identify and evaluate the available literature based on the sedative effect of oral midazolam compared with midazolam administered intranasally and also compare their effect on behavior of pediatric dental patients. Objective: This systematic review compares the sedative effect and the effect on behavior with oral midazolam and intranasal midazolam. Methods: A search was undertaken through PubMed Central, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Lilacs, Science Direct and SIGLE. All the studies included the comparison of the sedative effect of oral and intranasal midazolam. Database search identified 178 articles. 165 articles were excluded based on titles and duplication. Abstract and complete text of 13 articles were thoroughly evaluated. Four articles were included based on the inclusion criteria to meet the criteria. The selected studies analyzed the children's behavior or anxiety by oral midazolam in comparison to intranasal midazolam administration. Results: Among the four studies included in the present review, risk of bias was high in all the articles. The high risk was obtained due to inadequate blinding of personnel and participants in the study, improper allocation concealment and inadequacy in blinding of the outcome assessment. Also, difference observed between oral and intranasal midazolam routes on behavior and sedation level in the studies included in this review was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Studies comparing the effect on behavior of oral and intranasal midazolam in children are limited. More number of high-quality clinical trials evaluating the sedative effect and effect on behavior of oral and intranasal midazolam in pediatric dental patients is required. How to cite this article: Kotian N, Subramanian EMG, Jeevanandan G. Comparing the Sedative Effect of Oral and Intranasal Midazolam and their Effect on Behavior in Pediatric Dental Patients. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022;15(1):128-134.
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.