Cargando…

Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients

BACKGROUND: The goal of this investigation was to compare the behavioral and physiological effects of three sedative drug regimens: oral meperidine (OM), submucosal meperidine (SM) and oral midazolam (M) in healthy pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study sample consisted of thirty chil...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Toomarian, Lida, Salem, Katayoun, Ansari, Ghassem
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3731956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23946732
_version_ 1782279220974583808
author Toomarian, Lida
Salem, Katayoun
Ansari, Ghassem
author_facet Toomarian, Lida
Salem, Katayoun
Ansari, Ghassem
author_sort Toomarian, Lida
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The goal of this investigation was to compare the behavioral and physiological effects of three sedative drug regimens: oral meperidine (OM), submucosal meperidine (SM) and oral midazolam (M) in healthy pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study sample consisted of thirty children aged 24-72 months (mean = 41.1) exhibiting definitely negative behavior. Three sedative regimens including: Oral meperidine/hydroxyzine, oral midazolam/hydroxyzine and submucosal meperidine/oral hydroxyzine were administered randomly during three consecutive appointments with a crossover design. Houpt behavioral scale was employed for evaluating the sedation effect of each regimen by a calibrated independent Pediatric dentist. Physiologic parameters were also recorded including blood oxygen saturation and pulse rate. Data was analyzed using Wilcoxon-signed ranked test, Mc-Nemar, GEE Logistic regression, Friedman, Fisher exact and Cochran tests for significance. RESULTS: Overall success rates were 50%, 46.7% and 26.7% for submucosal meperidine, oral meperidine and oral midazolam, respectively (P = 0.03). The probability of achieving a success in behavior control was more in 48-72 month olds. Child's age and drug type were the two main predictors of altered behavior. Evaluating the differences between the effects of three tested regimens on recorded physiological parameters showed no significant differences. CONCLUSION: All three regimens were proved safe within the limits of the current study. Meperidine sedation in both routes was considered to be more effective. Although there was less sleep and more head/oral resistance in midazolam group, the difference between groups was not significant.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3731956
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37319562013-08-14 Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients Toomarian, Lida Salem, Katayoun Ansari, Ghassem Dent Res J (Isfahan) Original Article BACKGROUND: The goal of this investigation was to compare the behavioral and physiological effects of three sedative drug regimens: oral meperidine (OM), submucosal meperidine (SM) and oral midazolam (M) in healthy pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study sample consisted of thirty children aged 24-72 months (mean = 41.1) exhibiting definitely negative behavior. Three sedative regimens including: Oral meperidine/hydroxyzine, oral midazolam/hydroxyzine and submucosal meperidine/oral hydroxyzine were administered randomly during three consecutive appointments with a crossover design. Houpt behavioral scale was employed for evaluating the sedation effect of each regimen by a calibrated independent Pediatric dentist. Physiologic parameters were also recorded including blood oxygen saturation and pulse rate. Data was analyzed using Wilcoxon-signed ranked test, Mc-Nemar, GEE Logistic regression, Friedman, Fisher exact and Cochran tests for significance. RESULTS: Overall success rates were 50%, 46.7% and 26.7% for submucosal meperidine, oral meperidine and oral midazolam, respectively (P = 0.03). The probability of achieving a success in behavior control was more in 48-72 month olds. Child's age and drug type were the two main predictors of altered behavior. Evaluating the differences between the effects of three tested regimens on recorded physiological parameters showed no significant differences. CONCLUSION: All three regimens were proved safe within the limits of the current study. Meperidine sedation in both routes was considered to be more effective. Although there was less sleep and more head/oral resistance in midazolam group, the difference between groups was not significant. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013 /pmc/articles/PMC3731956/ /pubmed/23946732 Text en Copyright: © Dental Research Journal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Toomarian, Lida
Salem, Katayoun
Ansari, Ghassem
Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients
title Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients
title_full Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients
title_fullStr Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients
title_short Assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients
title_sort assessing the sedative effect of oral vs submucosal meperidine in pediatric dental patients
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3731956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23946732
work_keys_str_mv AT toomarianlida assessingthesedativeeffectoforalvssubmucosalmeperidineinpediatricdentalpatients
AT salemkatayoun assessingthesedativeeffectoforalvssubmucosalmeperidineinpediatricdentalpatients
AT ansarighassem assessingthesedativeeffectoforalvssubmucosalmeperidineinpediatricdentalpatients