Suppr超能文献

右美托咪定与咪达唑仑在儿童牙科治疗中镇静效果的比较分析:一项系统评价与荟萃分析

Comparative Analysis of Sedative Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam in Pediatric Dental Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Oza Ranu R, Sharma Varsha, Suryawanshi Tejas, Lulla Saniya, Bajaj Pavan, Dhadse Prasad

机构信息

Department of Periodontics and Implantology, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.

Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2022 Aug 26;14(8):e28452. doi: 10.7759/cureus.28452. eCollection 2022 Aug.

Abstract

Children are particularly terrified of having dental treatment. They are physically resistant, frail, and unwilling to cooperate. This severe distress during the pre-operative phase could cause the dentist to have issues with behavior control. Additionally, it may make pediatric dental treatments less effective. In order to reduce anxiety and control behavior in children receiving dental care, sedation is a pharmacological management technique that supports the provision of effective and high-quality dental services. The aim is to compare and evaluate the efficacy of sedative agents like dexmedetomidine and midazolam in pediatric dental practice. A thorough review of the literature was conducted using electronic databases like "MEDLINE, PubMed, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), as well as the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, www.clinicaltrials.gov, conference proceedings abstracts, a bibliography of pertinent references, and manual searches of journals, conferences, and books". There were no restrictions on the language or the date of publication when searching the electronic databases. Randomized controlled trials were included which compared dexmedetomidine and midazolam in children up to 16 years of age subjected to dental treatment. Information on procedures, participants, interventions, outcome measures, and results were independently extracted by three review writers (TS, SL, and RO). Trial authors were contacted for papers that were confusing or lacking information. The risk of bias was evaluated for each study. We adhered to the Cochrane statistical recommendations. Three trials totaling 229 participants were included. All three studies were rated as having a low risk of bias, with none of them having a high or unclear risk. Meta-analysis was done for the available data for the primary outcomes like sedation level and recovery time. We searched for randomized controlled trials up to Jan 31, 2020. Participants are randomly assigned to an intervention or control group in randomized controlled trial research. While patients in the control group often get a placebo therapy or procedure, those in the interventional group receive the treatment being studied. We found three studies eligible to include in the review. One study evaluated 73 individuals who received general anesthesia for dental treatment. There were 72 and 84 individuals in the second and third investigations, respectively. All the participants of the three studies were divided randomly into two groups and were subjected to dexmedetomidine and midazolam as sedative agents. We gave the evidence an "extremely low certainty" rating. Because there are just three short trials with unusual parameters for comparison, the results are questionable. Overall, the results do not allow us to draw any firm conclusions. Three randomized controlled trials included in this systematic review reported data with varying conclusions; hence we recommend more randomized controlled trials to be conducted on this subject matter.

摘要

儿童特别害怕接受牙科治疗。他们身体抵抗力差、体质虚弱且不愿配合。术前阶段的这种严重痛苦可能会导致牙医在行为控制方面出现问题。此外,这可能会使儿童牙科治疗效果不佳。为了减轻接受牙科护理儿童的焦虑并控制其行为,镇静是一种药物管理技术,有助于提供有效且高质量的牙科服务。目的是比较和评估右美托咪定和咪达唑仑等镇静剂在儿童牙科实践中的疗效。使用“MEDLINE、PubMed和CENTRAL(Cochrane对照试验中央注册库)等电子数据库,以及世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台www.clinicaltrials.gov、会议论文摘要、相关参考文献书目,并对手册、会议和书籍进行手工检索”对文献进行了全面回顾。在搜索电子数据库时,对语言或出版日期没有限制。纳入了比较右美托咪定和咪达唑仑在16岁以下接受牙科治疗儿童中的随机对照试验。三名综述作者(TS、SL和RO)独立提取了有关程序、参与者、干预措施、结局指标和结果的信息。对于令人困惑或缺乏信息的论文,与试验作者进行了联系。对每项研究的偏倚风险进行了评估。我们遵循了Cochrane统计建议。纳入了三项试验,共229名参与者。所有三项研究的偏倚风险均被评为低,没有一项具有高或不明确的风险。对镇静水平和恢复时间等主要结局的可用数据进行了荟萃分析。我们搜索了截至2020年1月31日的随机对照试验。在随机对照试验研究中,参与者被随机分配到干预组或对照组。对照组的患者通常接受安慰剂治疗或程序,而干预组的患者接受正在研究的治疗。我们发现三项研究符合纳入综述的条件。一项研究评估了73名接受牙科治疗全身麻醉的个体。第二项和第三项研究分别有72名和84名个体。三项研究的所有参与者均被随机分为两组,并接受右美托咪定和咪达唑仑作为镇静剂。我们给证据的评级为“极低确定性”。因为只有三项简短试验,比较参数异常,结果值得怀疑。总体而言,结果不允许我们得出任何确凿结论。本系统综述中纳入的三项随机对照试验报告的数据结论各异;因此,我们建议针对该主题进行更多的随机对照试验。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0539/9510641/c194725b17b4/cureus-0014-00000028452-i01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验