African Journal of Paediatric Surgery About APSON | PAPSA  
Home About us Editorial Board Current issue Search Archives Ahead Of Print Subscribe Instructions Submission Contact Login 
Users Online: 272Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 219-224

Intramuscular compared to intravenous midazolam for paediatric sedation: A study on cardiopulmonary safety and effectiveness


1 Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Trauma Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Paediatrics' Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Chemical Injuries Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Bita Najafian
Department of Paediatrics' Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Mollasadra Street, Vanak Square, Tehran
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0189-6725.137329

Rights and Permissions

Background: Sedation in children remains a controversial issue in emergency departments (ED). Midazolam, as a benzodiazepine is widely used for procedural sedation among paediatrics. We compared the effectiveness and safety of two forms of midazolam prescription; intramuscular (IM) and intravenous (IV). Patients and Methods: A cohort study was conducted on two matched groups of 30 children referred to our ED between 2010 and 2011. The first group received IM midazolam (0.3 mg/kg) and the second group received IV midazolam (0.15 mg/kg) for sedation. For evaluating effectiveness, sedation, irritation and cooperation score were followed every 15 min for 60 min and for safety assessment, vital signs and O 2 saturation were observed. Results: Mean age was 6.18 ± 2.88 years and 31 patients (51.7%) were male. All patients were sedated completely after using first dose. There was an overall complication rate of 68.3%. 35 (58.3%) patients presented euphoria as the most common complication, but there was no statistical difference between the two groups (P = 0.396). Cases who received IV midazolam became sedated faster than those received IM midazolam (P > 0.001). The vital signs including heart rate, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure and O 2 saturation changed significantly between and within groups during the sedation (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Both forms of midazolam, IM and IV, are effective and safe for paediatric sedation in ED. Although the sedative with IV form might appear sooner, IM form of midazolam can be effectively used in patient with limited IV access. Patients are better to observe closely for psychological side-effects.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3822    
    Printed96    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded231    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal