Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38117527›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2024

Preoperative Midazolam and Patient-Centered Outcomes of Older Patients: The I-PROMOTE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Ana Kowark, András P Keszei, Gerhard Schneider, Stefanie Pilge, Frederick Schneider, David P Obert, Marie-Therese Georgii, Markus Heim, Rolf Rossaint, Sebastian Ziemann and 19 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03052660 (Impact of Preoperative Midazolam on Outcome of Elderly Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03052660 phase4completednot on this map

Impact of Preoperative Midazolam on Outcome of Elderly Patients: a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorRWTH Aachen UniversityRan2017 to 2019Enrolled782ConditionsPreanesthetic MedicationArmsMidazolam, Placebo oral capsule
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Frailty in anesthesia.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors.

Ana KowarkDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
András P KeszeiCenter for Translational & Clinical Research Aachen, Medical Faculty RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Gerhard SchneiderDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
Stefanie PilgeDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
Frederick SchneiderDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
David P ObertDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
Marie-Therese GeorgiiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
Markus HeimDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
Rolf RossaintDepartment of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Sebastian ZiemannDepartment of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Julia van WaesbergheDepartment of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Michael CzaplikDepartment of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Friedrich K PühringerDepartment for Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine, Pain Therapy and Palliative Care, Kreiskliniken Reutlingen, Reutlingen, Germany.
Christian MinarskiDepartment for Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine, Pain Therapy and Palliative Care, Kreiskliniken Reutlingen, Reutlingen, Germany.
Verena MayDepartment for Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine, Pain Therapy and Palliative Care, Kreiskliniken Reutlingen, Reutlingen, Germany.
Tobias MalisiDepartment for Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine, Pain Therapy and Palliative Care, Kreiskliniken Reutlingen, Reutlingen, Germany.
Berthold DrexlerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Carmen Maria RingDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Phillip EnglerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Roman TillyDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Petra BischoffDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Surgical Intensive Care, Pain and Palliative Care, Marien Hospital Herne, University Hospital of Ruhr University Bochum, Herne, Germany.
Ulrich FreyDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Surgical Intensive Care, Pain and Palliative Care, Marien Hospital Herne, University Hospital of Ruhr University Bochum, Herne, Germany.
Maria WittmannDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Martin SoehleDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Thomas SallerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Peter KienbaumDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Moritz KretzschmarDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Mark CoburnDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
I-PROMOTE Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The effect of oral midazolam premedication on patient satisfaction in older patients undergoing surgery is unclear, despite its widespread use. Objective: To determine the differences in global perioperative satisfaction in patients with preoperative administration of oral midazolam compared with placebo. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 9 German hospitals between October 2017 and May 2019 (last follow-up, June 24, 2019). Eligible patients aged 65 to 80 years who were scheduled for elective inpatient surgery for at least 30 minutes under general anesthesia and with planned extubation were enrolled. Data were analyzed from November 2019 to December 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive oral midazolam, 3.75 mg (n = 309), or placebo (n = 307) 30 to 45 minutes prior to anesthesia induction. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was global patient satisfaction evaluated using the self-reported Evaluation du Vécu de l'Anesthésie Generale (EVAN-G) questionnaire on the first postoperative day. Key secondary outcomes included sensitivity and subgroup analyses of the primary outcome, perioperative patient vital data, adverse events, serious complications, and cognitive and functional recovery up to 30 days postoperatively. Results: Among 616 randomized patients, 607 were included in the primary analysis. Of these, 377 (62.1%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 71.9 (4.4) years. The mean (SD) global index of patient satisfaction did not differ between the midazolam and placebo groups (69.5 [10.7] vs 69.6 [10.8], respectively; mean difference, -0.2; 95% CI, -1.9 to 1.6; P = .85). Sensitivity (per-protocol population, multiple imputation) and subgroup analyses (anxiety, frailty, sex, and previous surgical experience) did not alter the primary results. Secondary outcomes did not differ, except for a higher proportion of patients with hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg) at anesthesia induction in the placebo group. Conclusion and Relevance: A single low dose of oral midazolam premedication did not alter the global perioperative patient satisfaction of older patients undergoing surgery or that of patients with anxiety. These results may be affected by the low dose of oral midazolam. Further trials-including a wider population with commonplace low-dose intravenous midazolam and plasma level measurements-are needed. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03052660.

Indexed as

MidazolamPatient SatisfactionAgedAnesthesia, GeneralDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMalePatient-Centered CarePersonal SatisfactionMidazolam

Identifiers

PMID38117527
PMCPMC10733850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.