ArticleEmergency medicine Australasia : EMA2026
Paediatric Procedural Sedation and Analgesia in Emergency Departments: A Delphi Consensus Study.
Article in Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a national expert consensus on procedural sedation and analgesia practices in paediatric emergency departments in Spain and identify priority areas for standardisation, safety and implementation.
methodsWe conducted a modified two-round Delphi study with a panel of 28 clinicians with expertise in paediatric emergency care and procedural sedation from 23 centres in different regions of Spain. Participants rated key domains related to patient selection, fasting, monitoring, staffing, pharmacological strategies, training and safety standards. We used a predefined threshold of ≥ 70% agreement to establish consensus in both rounds.
resultsThe panel reached strong consensus across core domains of paediatric procedural sedation practice, including minimum safety requirements, monitoring standards, staff competencies and organisational priorities. Strong agreement supported the standardisation of procedural sedation processes. Areas of residual disagreement highlighted persistent variation in implementation and resource availability across departments. Pharmacological preferences differed according to the clinical scenario; ketamine was preferred for more painful procedures, but drug preferences for less invasive procedures or imaging procedures varied.
conclusionThis national Delphi consensus provides a pragmatic framework to support safer and more consistent procedural sedation practice in paediatric emergency departments. Although the study included only centres in Spain, it addressed operational and clinical challenges common worldwide, and its findings are likely relevant for all emergency departments seeking to improve paediatric sedation.
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.