Trial reportAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2025
Comparison of the incidence of recovery agitation with two different doses of ketamine in procedural sedation: A randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Comparison of the incidence of recovery agitation with two different doses of ketamine in procedural sedation: A randomized clinical trial.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe objective was to compare the incidence of recovery agitation and efficacy of two different intravenous (IV) doses of ketamine (0.5 mg/kg vs. 1 mg/kg) in adult patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) requiring procedural sedation with ketamine.
methodsThis randomized, prospective clinical trial included patients aged 18-75 years who required procedural sedation with ketamine in the ED. Patients were randomized to receive IV ketamine at either 0.5 mg/kg (low dose) or 1 mg/kg (high dose). The primary outcome was the incidence of recovery agitation, assessed by the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) at 5, 15, and 30 min following the procedure, in both dosage groups. Secondary outcomes included overall efficacy, sedation duration, and changes in vital signs.
resultsA total of 108 patients were enrolled in the study, 54 in each group. The median (IQR) RASS scores at 5, 15, and 30 min were -4 (-5 to -4), -1 (-1.3 to 0), and 0 (-1 to 0.5), respectively, in the low-dose group and -4 (-5 to -4), -1 (-3 to 0), and 0 (0 to 0), respectively, in the high-dose group. The incidence of recovery agitation was similar between the low- and high-dose groups (difference 1.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -14.8% to 18.4%). No significant difference was observed in sedation duration between the two groups (difference 0%, 95% CI -3.0% to 4.0%). While no additional ketamine was required in the high-dose group, four patients (7.4%) in the low-dose group required an additional half-dose (difference 7.4%, 95% CI -2.3% to 18.7%). Changes in vital signs were similar between the two groups.
conclusionsThere was no significant difference in recovery agitation, sedation duration, and changes in vital signs between 0.5 and 1 mg/kg IV ketamine for procedural sedation in the ED.
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.