ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Intranasal and Oral Pharmacological Sedation in Pediatric Dentistry: A Thematic Scoping Review of Efficacy, Recovery, and Safety Outcomes.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 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
introductionConscious sedation (CS) is commonly recommended in pediatric dental clinics to manage uncooperative and anxious patients. Various routes of drug administration have been introduced to achieve effective CS. Among these, the intranasal (IN) route has gained popularity in dentistry due to its non-invasive nature. However, there is currently no comprehensive thematic review analyzing the efficacy and safety of drug regimens delivered via the intranasal route alone or in combination with other administration routes. Therefore, the aim of the present review is to thematically analyze the efficacy and safety of different drug regimens used for conscious sedation delivered through the intranasal route and/or in combination with other routes. MATERIAL AND
methodThis scoping review was conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. The protocol was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) prior to data extraction. Predefined inclusion criteria were developed, and five electronic databases were searched. The search identified a total of 239 articles from different databases. After evaluation and removal of duplicates, a total of 54 articles were assessed for full-text eligibility. Finally, 18 articles were included, and data extraction was performed. To develop themes the included articles were imported to the N-vivo software package.
resultsSix themes and sixteen subthemes were developed. The major themes were route efficacy and behavioral outcomes, onset of action, patients' acceptance and tolerance, special needs population, recovery and duration, safety profile and adverse events.
conclusionCombined intranasal and oral conscious sedation is a generally safe and well-accepted approach in pediatric dentistry, but variations in recovery time, patient acceptance, and adverse events necessitate individualized sedation strategies.
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.