ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
A global cross-sectional survey on neonatal analgosedation: unveiling global trends and challenges through latent class analysis.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reducing tracheal intubation adverse events and severe desaturations by increasing intubation premedication use in infants <1500 g: a quality improvement initiative.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Analgesia and sedation trends in a level IV NICU, 2014-2024: Opioid and dexmedetomidine use.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Pain assessment and management practices in Hungarian neonatal intensive care units: a nationwide survey.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Pharmacological therapy of neonatal analgosedation: current status, dilemmas, and perspectives.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Use of lorazepam for analgosedation during mechanical ventilation in pediatric intensive care.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to analyze global prescribing patterns for analgosedation in neonates during four critical care scenarios. The research explores existing patterns, their association with geographic and sociodemographic index (SDI), and adherence to evidence-based practices.
methodsData from a 2024 global survey of 924 responses to 28 questions were analyzed, focusing on four items for their high variability: premedication in intubation (Q17), sedation in preterm (Q19) and full-term newborns (Q23), and perinatal asphyxia (Q26). Latent class analysis (LCA) classified neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) prescriptions into patterns, assigning participants to the most likely class. Demographic variables, including geographic region and SDI, were compared using chi-square tests to assess associations.
resultsThree distinct prescribing patterns emerged for each scenario. In premedication during intubation, Europe and North America predominantly used Class 1, adhering to guidelines with fentanyl, atropine, and muscle relaxants. In contrast, Class 2, standard in Asia and Latin America-Caribbean, primarily utilized fentanyl and midazolam, with rare use of atropine and muscle relaxants. For analgosedation in newborns, higher-SDI NICUs favored fentanyl, while lower-SDI NICUs preferred midazolam or morphine combinations. In perinatal asphyxia cases, fentanyl was the leading choice in Class 3, especially in Europe. Dexmedetomidine use was limited, primarily appearing in Class 1 NICUs.
conclusionThe study highlights substantial regional variability in neonatal analgosedation, influenced by SDI and geography. Despite established guidelines, gaps in evidence-based implementation persist. These findings underscore the need for global standardization of neonatal care protocols and further research on the long-term safety of midazolam and dexmedetomidine. What is Known: • Previous research has demonstrated significant disparities in prescribing patterns for neonatal analgosedation across geographic areas influenced by demographic and socioeconomic factors. • Midazolam remains a commonly utilized agent in neonatal analgosedation despite evidence suggesting potential neurodevelopmental risks, particularly in premature infants. • Current guidelines regarding neonatal analgesia and sedation, including premedication for endotracheal intubation, are not consistently implemented, particularly in regions characterized by lower sociodemographic indices. WHAT IS NEW: • This study employs Latent Class Analysis (LCA) to categorize global neonatal prescribing practices into three distinct patterns, elucidating regional differences and compliance with evidence-based guidelines. • Care providers working in countries with higher Sociodemographic Index (SDI) are more likely to adhere to evidence-based practices, such as intubation premedication, than regions with medium or medium-high SDI. • The use of midazolam in full-term and preterm newborns exposes a gap between evidence-based guidelines and clinical practices. This situation calls for more research on the long-term safety of midazolam and the development of standardized sedation protocols that emphasize safer alternatives to reduce associated risks in neonatal care. • Dexmedetomidine is underutilized globally despite its increasing applications, highlighting the need for more pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic research before its inclusion in clinical guidelines.
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.