Torres-Pérez Javier, Tapia-García Israel, Rosales-Berber Miguel Angel, Hernández-Sierra Juan Francisco, Pozos-Guillén Amaury de J
Pediatric Dentistry Posgraduate Program, Facultad de Estomatologia, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Mexico.
J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2007 Spring;31(3):183-6. doi: 10.17796/jcpd.31.3.e82526q0432375n0.
The aim of this study was to compare the clinical success of three conscious sedation regimens for pediatric dental patients. A clinical trial was performed wherein dental treatment was administered to pediatric patients ASA I and II under conscious sedation.. Fifty-four children were divided into three groups of 18 patients each, randomly assigned Group A received hydroxyzine (2 mg/kg 2 h before treatment and a subsequent dose of 1 mg/kg 20 min before treatment) orally; group B received 0.50 mg/kg midazolam mixed with 1.5 mg/kg hydroxyzine 20 min before treatment orally; group C received chloral hydrate, 50 mg/kg mixed with 1.5 mg/kg hydroxyzine 20 min before treatment orally. The Ohio State Behavioral Rating Scale (OSBRS) showed statistically significant differences between groups B and C with respect to group A. The regimens of midazolam or chloral hydrate mixed with hydroxyzine represent excellent choices for conscious sedation regimens for pediatric dental patients.
本研究的目的是比较三种用于儿童牙科患者的清醒镇静方案的临床成功率。进行了一项临床试验,在清醒镇静下对ASA I和II级的儿童患者进行牙科治疗。54名儿童被分为三组,每组18名患者,随机分组:A组口服羟嗪(治疗前2小时2mg/kg,治疗前20分钟后续剂量1mg/kg);B组在治疗前20分钟口服0.50mg/kg咪达唑仑与1.5mg/kg羟嗪混合剂;C组在治疗前20分钟口服50mg/kg水合氯醛与1.5mg/kg羟嗪混合剂。俄亥俄州立行为评定量表(OSBRS)显示,B组和C组与A组相比有统计学上的显著差异。咪达唑仑或水合氯醛与羟嗪混合的方案是儿童牙科患者清醒镇静方案的极佳选择。