Trial reportScientific reports2026
Comparative sedative effects of intravenous etomidate/fentanyl/midazolam versus propofol/fentanyl/midazolam combination for dental treatment of uncooperative children: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compared the sedative effects of intravenous etomidate/fentanyl/midazolam versus propofol/fentanyl/midazolam combination, with a primary focus on behavioral outcomes assessed by the Houpt scale and hemodynamic safety, for dental treatment of uncooperative children between 3 and 10 years. This patient- and assessor-blinded, crossover clinical trial was conducted on 40 children (27 females, 13 males; mean age, 4.67 ± 1.46 years; mean weight, 15.93 ± 4.2 kg) with negative and very negative behavior, as assessed by the Frankl scale. The children were randomly assigned to 2 groups (n = 20). Group 1 received etomidate (0.2 mg/kg), fentanyl (1 µg/kg), and midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) combination in the first treatment session, and propofol (1 mg/kg), fentanyl (1 µg/kg), and midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) in the second treatment session. This order was reversed in group 2. Hemodynamic indices, including the heart rate (HR) and arterial oxygen saturation (SPO2), were monitored during the procedure, and the behavior of children was recorded using the Houpt behavioral rating scale. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney and t tests (α = 0.05). The hemodynamic indices were within the safe range, with no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). At the time of injection, a statistically significant but clinically modest difference in SPO2 was observed favoring the etomidate group (99.75% vs. 98.85%, P = 0.003); however, mean SPO2 remained above 97% in both groups throughout all procedures. The mean HR showed greater stability with less fluctuation from baseline in the etomidate group compared to propofol (e.g., smaller magnitude of change at injection in the second session, P < 0.005 overall for key time points). The two groups were similar regarding the Houpt scale, except during recovery, where the etomidate group had a significantly higher behavior score (7.45 vs. 6.60, P = 0.007). Both combinations are highly effective and safe for the intravenous sedation of uncooperative children, providing comparable intra-procedural sedation. However, the etomidate/fentanyl/midazolam combination demonstrated specific advantages regarding intra-procedural heart rate stability and more favorable behavioral scores during the recovery period.Trial registration IRCT20230515058193N1, registeredretrospectively on 22 November 2024 in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials ( https://www.irct.ir/trial/77589 ).
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.