Department of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, UESTC Chengdu Women's & Children's Central Hospital, China.
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 12;16(1):e0245338. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245338. eCollection 2021.
In Asian countries, oral chloral hydrate is the most commonly used sedative for non-invasive procedures. Theoretically, mild sleep deprivation could be considered as one of assisted techniques. However, there is no consensus on sleep deprivation facilitating the sedation during non-painful procedures in children. The aim of our study is to analyze the clinical data of children undergoing non-invasive procedural sedation retrospectively and to evaluate the association between mild sleep deprivation and sedative effects in non-invasive procedures.
Consecutive patients undergoing chloral hydrate sedation for non-invasive procedures between December 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020 were included in this study. The propensity score analysis with 1: 1 ratio was used to match the baseline variables between patients with sleep deprivation and non-sleep deprivation. The primary outcome was the failure rate of sedation with the initial dose. The secondary outcomes included the failure rate of sedation after supplementation of chloral hydrate, the incidence of major and minor adverse events, initial and supplemental dose of chloral hydrate, and the length of sedation time.
Of the 7789 patients undergoing chloral hydrate sedation, 6352 were treated with sleep deprivation and 1437 with non-sleep deprivation. After propensity score matching, 1437 pairs were produced. The failure rate of sedation with initial chlorate hydrate was not significantly different in two groups (8.6% [123/1437] vs. 10.6% [152/1437], p = 0.08), nor were the failure rates with supplemental chlorate hydrate (0.8% [12/1437] vs. 0.9% [13/1437], p = 1) and the length of sedation time (58 [45, 75] vs. 58 [45, 75] min; p = 0.93).
The current results do not support sleep deprivation have a beneficial effect in reducing the pediatric chloral hydrate sedation failure rate. The routine use of sleep deprivation for pediatric sedation is unnecessary.
在亚洲国家,口服水合氯醛是最常用于非侵入性操作的镇静剂。理论上,轻度睡眠剥夺可以被视为辅助技术之一。然而,对于在非疼痛性操作中轻度睡眠剥夺是否有助于镇静,目前尚无共识。我们的研究目的是回顾性分析接受非侵入性程序性镇静的儿童的临床数据,并评估轻度睡眠剥夺与非侵入性操作中镇静效果之间的关联。
纳入 2019 年 12 月 1 日至 2020 年 6 月 30 日期间接受水合氯醛镇静进行非侵入性操作的连续患者。采用 1:1 比例的倾向评分分析来匹配睡眠剥夺组和非睡眠剥夺组之间的基线变量。主要结局是初始剂量镇静失败率。次要结局包括水合氯醛补充后镇静失败率、主要和次要不良事件发生率、水合氯醛初始和补充剂量以及镇静时间长度。
在 7789 例接受水合氯醛镇静的患者中,6352 例接受睡眠剥夺治疗,1437 例接受非睡眠剥夺治疗。经过倾向评分匹配后,产生了 1437 对。两组初始水合氯醛镇静失败率无显著差异(8.6%[123/1437] vs. 10.6%[152/1437],p=0.08),补充水合氯醛镇静失败率也无差异(0.8%[12/1437] vs. 0.9%[13/1437],p=1),镇静时间长度也无差异(58[45,75] vs. 58[45,75]min;p=0.93)。
目前的结果不支持睡眠剥夺在降低儿科水合氯醛镇静失败率方面有有益作用。常规使用睡眠剥夺进行儿科镇静是不必要的。