ArticlePaediatric anaesthesia2026
Comparison of Discharge Readiness in Pediatric Patients: Oral Versus Intranasal Preoperative Midazolam Administration.
Article in Paediatric anaesthesia, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMidazolam is commonly administered orally or intranasally to reduce preoperative anxiety in children undergoing tympanostomy. Prior studies suggest differences in recovery exist between the two routes, but their impact on post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay remains unclear.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review of pediatric patients aged 6 months to 10 years undergoing tympanostomy at Nemours Children's Hospital, Central Florida, between November 2023 and November 2024. Patients were grouped by midazolam route (intranasal 0.2 mg/kg IV formulation vs. oral 0.5 mg/kg syrup). The primary outcome was PACU length of stay, defined as time from PACU arrival to discharge based on standard hospital criteria. Predictors of administration route were evaluated using univariate logistic regression, and PACU length of stay was analyzed using age-adjusted ANCOVA with backward stepwise variable selection.
resultsA total of 463 patients were included: 322 received oral midazolam and 141 received intranasal midazolam. In unadjusted analysis, intranasal midazolam was associated with a shorter PACU stay (mean 39.7 vs. 42.9 min, p = 0.02). However, patients receiving intranasal midazolam were significantly younger (31.5 vs. 37.8 months, p < 0.001). After adjustment for age, age emerged as the only independent predictor of PACU length of stay, and the association between administration route and PACU duration was attenuated and no longer significant (p = 0.15).
conclusionsAge, rather than route of midazolam administration, primarily explained differences in PACU discharge readiness among children undergoing tympanostomy. Previously reported differences in recovery time between oral and intranasal midazolam may reflect age-related confounding rather than a true effect of route. Future prospective, age-stratified studies are needed to clarify this relationship and refine pediatric sedation practices.
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.