Preethy Neethu Ann, Somasundaram Sujatha
Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Contemp Clin Dent. 2021 Apr-Jun;12(2):105-120. doi: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_470_20. Epub 2021 Jun 14.
The aim of this study was to systematically identify and evaluate the available literature on the effectiveness of intranasal midazolam sedation compared with midazolam administered through other routes in the sedation and behavior management of children during dental treatment.
The search was done using electronic databases such as PubMed Central, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, LILACS, ScienceDirect, and SIGLE. All studies comparing the sedative effect and behavior management effectiveness of intranasal midazolam with midazolam administered through other routes in children were included.
Electronic database search identified 163 articles, out of which 143 were excluded after reading titles and removing duplication. The remaining 20 studies were evaluated in detail. A final of 13 studies were included based on the inclusion criteria. Among the 13 studies included in the present review, a high risk of bias was noted in all the 13 articles. There was no adequate blinding of personnel and participants in the study, allocation concealment was improper and presence of inadequate blinding of the outcome assessment. . Statistically, no significant difference was observed between intranasal midazolam and other midazolam routes on behavior and sedation level in the studies included in this review.
Limited studies are available pertaining to the sedative and behavioral effects of intranasal midazolam, and thus, this review recommends need for more research evaluating the sedative effect of intranasal midazolam in comparison with midazolam administered through other routes in the behavior management of children during dental treatment.
本研究旨在系统地识别和评估关于在儿童牙科治疗镇静和行为管理中,鼻内给予咪达唑仑镇静与通过其他途径给予咪达唑仑相比有效性的现有文献。
使用电子数据库进行检索,如美国国立医学图书馆的生物医学与生命科学期刊数据库、考克兰系统评价数据库、拉丁美洲及加勒比地区卫生科学数据库、科学Direct数据库和灰色文献数据库。纳入所有比较儿童鼻内给予咪达唑仑与通过其他途径给予咪达唑仑的镇静效果和行为管理有效性的研究。
电子数据库检索识别出163篇文章,阅读标题并去除重复后排除了143篇。对其余20项研究进行了详细评估。根据纳入标准最终纳入13项研究。在本综述纳入的13项研究中,所有13篇文章均存在高偏倚风险。研究中人员和参与者未充分设盲,分配隐藏不当,结果评估未充分设盲。在本综述纳入的研究中,统计学上未观察到鼻内给予咪达唑仑与其他咪达唑仑给药途径在行为和镇静水平上有显著差异。
关于鼻内给予咪达唑仑的镇静和行为影响的研究有限,因此,本综述建议需要更多研究来评估在儿童牙科治疗行为管理中,鼻内给予咪达唑仑与通过其他途径给予咪达唑仑相比的镇静效果。