These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Rectal, oral and nasal premedication using midazolam in children aged 1-6 years. A comparative clinical study].
    Author: Tolksdorf W, Eick C.
    Journal: Anaesthesist; 1991 Dec; 40(12):661-7. PubMed ID: 1781563.
    Abstract:
    Midazolam is often used for the premedication of children in the pre-school age group. Different noninvasive routes of administration have been described. In a prospective study we compared the effects of oral, rectal, and nasal midazolam in commonly used dosages. PATIENTS AND METHODS. Ninety children undergoing surgery under general anesthesia were assigned to oral (0.4 mg/kg) (MO), rectal (0.5 mg/kg) (MR), or nasal (0.2 mg/kg) midazolam (MN), according to the child's and/or parent's preferred route of administration, after having obtained the parent's informed consent. It was applied on the ward before transport to the operating room. The following parameters were assessed by the observer and the anesthesiologist at different times: sedation, acceptance (child, anesthesiologist), mood, emotion, resistance, pain, nausea and vomiting, blood pressure, and heart and respiratory rates. The Wilcoxon test (P less than 0.05) was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS. All groups were comparable with respect to age, weight, and surgery experience. There was no difference in the anesthesiologist's acceptance of the premedication or the cooperation of the children. The children accepted MO significantly better compared to MN and MR. The fastest onset of sedation was found after MR. Immediately after MN many children became euphoric, and it turned out that the effect of MN was rather euphoric than sedative. The effect of MO was good in many children, but less predictable. This led to a significant delay in transport to the operating room. MO children experienced more nausea and vomiting (P less than 0.05) in the postoperative period. There were no differences in physiological parameters. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The results can be explained by the different characteristics of absorption and patient acceptance. The route of administration according to the child's or parent's choice can be recommended but does not guarantee success. MR had the fastest onset of sedative action due to faster absorption of the drug. MN had a euphoric effect that resulted almost immediately. Oral premedication was best accepted, nasal administration worst. MO produced more side effects than MR and MN in the postoperative period. If the child accepts the rectal route of administration, this should be preferred because of the high success rate and few side effects.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]