ArticleSaudi journal of anaesthesia
A comparative study to assess the efficacy of atomized versus drops administration of intranasal midazolam as premedication in pediatric patients undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia-A prospective randomized double-blind study.
Article in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preoperative anxiety is one of the major challenges in perioperative care of pediatric surgical patients. Intranasal midazolam is a preferred route of drug administration owing to its ease of administration, non-invasive delivery, and rapid absorption through the highly vascular nasal mucosa, but the method of administration affects the efficacy. Aim: To compare the efficacy of atomized versus drop administration of intranasal midazolam (0.3 mg/kg) as a premedication in pediatric patients aged 2-6 years undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia. Methods: This prospective double-blind study was conducted in 60 pediatric patients randomly allocated into the Atomized Group or the nasal drops group. Drug acceptance by a 4-point Medicine Acceptance Scale, Sedation, anxiolysis at the time of shifting, assessed by the Parental Separation Anxiety Scale (PSAS), and adverse events. Results: Drug acceptance was superior in the atomized group compared to the nasal drops group (56.7% vs 3.3%; Conclusion: Atomized intranasal midazolam via mucosal atomization device is superior to conventional nasal drops in achieving higher drug acceptance, faster sedation, and better parental separation anxiolysis in pediatric patients.
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.