ArticleActa odontologica Scandinavica2024
Sedation of Adults with Orally Administered Midazolam in Dentistry - A Retrospective Study.
Article in Acta odontologica Scandinavica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- An updated evidence-informed framework for dental sedation: drugs, routes, patient selection, monitoring, and emergency preparedness.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe use of midazolam (MZ) has increased in dentistry, but the effect in adults is sparsely studied. The aim of this study was to investigate doses, effects, and side effects of orally administered MZ as a sedative for adults in a dental care organization. MATERIAL AND
methodsA retrospective record review was performed including all adult patients in the dental care organization ≥20 years receiving MZ, identified through a logbook for addictive drugs, during 2020. From patients' records, the following data were extracted: age, gender, medical history, reason for sedation, performed treatments, doses, effects, and side effects of MZ. Results: In total, 265 patients on 418 occasions had been sedated, which constituted 2.3 sedations per 1,000 visits and 3.3 sedations per 1,000 treated patients. Mean age was 40.8 years and 67.7% were females. The most common reason for sedation was anxiety. Mean dose in primary dental clinics was 7.9 mg and in specialist clinics, 6.8 mg (p < 0.001). Older patients (>70 years) had lower doses than younger (p < 0.001), while no difference was found between ages 55-70 years and those who were younger. Dental treatment was completed in 91.9% of occasions, and side effects were registered in 2.2%. Successful dental treatment was related to type of treatment performed.
conclusionsSedation is rarely used, particularly in primary dental care, and the use varies widely between clinics. MZ administered by dentists seems to be safe and effective. A sedation record should be used to make patient data such as weight and medical conditions available.
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.