Intranasal sedation using ketamine and midazolam for pediatric dental treatment (NASO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Heloisa Sousa Gomes, Analya Rodrigues Miranda, Karolline Alves Viana, Aline Carvalho Batista, Paulo Sucasas Costa, Anelise Daher, Geovanna de Castro Morais Machado, Joji Sado-Filho, Liliani Aires Candido Vieira, Patrícia Corrêa-Faria, Marie Therese Hosey, Luciane Rezende Costa, Heloisa Sousa Gomes, Analya Rodrigues Miranda, Karolline Alves Viana, Aline Carvalho Batista, Paulo Sucasas Costa, Anelise Daher, Geovanna de Castro Morais Machado, Joji Sado-Filho, Liliani Aires Candido Vieira, Patrícia Corrêa-Faria, Marie Therese Hosey, Luciane Rezende Costa

Abstract

Background: Uncooperative children may need to receive dental treatment under sedation, which is indicated when nonpharmacological behavior guidance is unsuccessful. There are randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different sedative protocols for dental procedures; however, the evidence for superiority of one form over another is weak. The primary aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of intranasally administered ketamine plus midazolam for the dental treatment of children.

Methods: We have designed a three-armed, parallel RCT to assess intranasal sedation using ketamine/midazolam in terms of the following measures: efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. Two- to 6-year-old healthy children, referred for dental treatment in a dental sedation center in Brazil due to uncooperative behavior and requiring restorative dental procedures, will be recruited. Each child will be randomly assigned to one of the three groups: A - Intranasal administration of ketamine (4.0 mg/kg, maximum 100 mg) and midazolam (0.2 mg/kg, maximum 5.0 mg); B - Oral administration of ketamine (4.0 mg/kg, maximum 100 mg) and midazolam (0.5 mg/kg, maximum 20 mg); and C - Oral administration of midazolam (1.0 mg/kg, maximum 20 mg). The primary outcome is the child's behavior assessed through an observational scale using digital videos of the restorative dental treatment under sedation. The secondary outcomes are as follows: acceptance of sedative administration; memory of intraoperative events; the child's stress; adverse events; the child's pain during the procedure; the parent's, dentists', and child's perceptions of sedation; and economic analysis. Measures will be taken at baseline and drug administration and during and after the dental procedure. The necessary sample size was estimated to be 84 children after a blinded interim analysis of the first 30 cases.

Discussion: This study will provide data that can substantially add to science and pediatric dentistry as it examines the effect of sedative regimes from different perspectives (outcomes).

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02447289 . Registered on 11 May 2015, named "Midazolam and Ketamine Effect Administered Through the Nose for Sedation of Children for Dental Treatment (NASO)."

Keywords: Administration intranasal; Amnesia; Child behavior; Conscious sedation; Dental care for children; Ketamine; Midazolam; Pain assessment; Patient satisfaction; Physiological; Stress.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the intranasal sedation using ketamine and midazolam for pediatric dental treatment (NASO) study protocol
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
A closer view of the children’s participation flow in the intranasal sedation using ketamine and midazolam for pediatric dental treatment (NASO) study protocol
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Schedule of the enrollment, interventions, and assessments
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Sequence of sedative administration

References

    1. Arnrup K, Broberg AG, Berggren U, Bodin L. Temperamental reactivity and negative emotionality in uncooperative children referred to specialized paediatric dentistry compared to children in ordinary dental care. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2007;17(6):419–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2007.00868.x.
    1. Klaassen MA, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J. Dental fear, communication, and behavioural management problems in children referred for dental problems. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2007;17(6):469–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2007.00870.x.
    1. Taskinen H, Kankaala T, Rajavaara P, Pesonen P, Laitala ML, Anttonen V. Self-reported causes for referral to dental treatment under general anaesthesia (DGA): a cross-sectional survey. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2014;15(2):105–12. doi: 10.1007/s40368-013-0071-2.
    1. Elledge R, Alexopoulos E, Hosey MT. Short communication: dental anxiety levels and outcomes of care: a preliminary report on experiences of a sedation assessment clinic. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2007;8(4):211–4. doi: 10.1007/BF03262599.
    1. Boyle CA, Newton T, Milgrom P. Who is referred for sedation for dentistry and why? Br Dent J. 2009;206(6):E12. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.251.
    1. Olley RC, Hosey MT, Renton T, Gallagher J. Why are children still having preventable extractions under general anaesthetic? A service evaluation of the views of parents of a high caries risk group of children. Br Dent J. 2011;2010(8):1–8.
    1. American Academy on Pediatric Dentistry Clinical Affairs Committee-Behavior Management Subcommittee. Guideline on behavior guidance for the pediatric dental patient. Pediatr Dent. 2015-2016;37(6):180–93. . Accessed on 25 May 2016.
    1. Lourenço-Matharu L, Ashley PF, Furness S. Sedation of children undergoing dental treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;3:CD003877.
    1. Moreira TA, Costa PS, Costa LR, Jesus-França CM, Antunes DE, Gomes HS, et al. Combined oral midazolam-ketamine better than midazolam alone for sedation of young children: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2013;23(3):207–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2012.01246.x.
    1. Wolfe TR, Braude DA. Intranasal medication delivery for children: a brief review and update. Pediatrics. 2010;126(3):532–7. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-0616.
    1. Bahetwar SK, Pandey RK, Saksena AK, Chandra G. A comparative evaluation of intranasal midazolam, ketamine and their combination for sedation of young uncooperative pediatric dental patients: a triple blind randomized crossover trial. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2011;35(4):415–20. doi: 10.17796/jcpd.35.4.l43h3354705u2574.
    1. Buonsenso D, Barone G, Valentini P, Pierri F, Riccardi R, Chiaretti A. Utility of intranasal ketamine and midazolam to perform gastric aspirates in children: a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomized study. BMC Pediatr. 2014;14:67. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-14-67.
    1. Lochary ME, Wilson S, Griffen AL, Coury DL. Temperament as a predictor of behavior for conscious sedation in dentistry. Pediatric Dent. 1993;15(5):348–52.
    1. Silva FC, Thuler LC. Cross-cultural adaptation and translation of two pain assessment tools in children and adolescents. J Pediatr (Rio J) 2008;84(4):344–9.
    1. Ghoneim MM. Drugs and human memory (part 1): clinical, theoretical, and methodologic issues. Anesthesiology. 2004;100(4):987–1002. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200404000-00033.
    1. Mason KP, Green SM, Piacevoli Q, International Sedation Task Force Adverse event reporting tool to standardize the reporting and tracking of adverse events during procedural sedation: a consensus document from the World SIVA International Sedation Task Force. Br J Anaesth. 2012;108(1):13–20. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer407.
    1. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.
    1. American Academy of Pediatrics; American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Guideline for monitoring and management of pediatric patients during and after sedation for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Pediatr Dent. 2015-2016-16;37(6):211–27. Available at: . Accessed on 25 May 2016.
    1. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gøtzsche PC, Krleža-Jerić K, et al. SPIRIT 2013 Statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:200–7. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-3-201302050-00583.
    1. American Society of Anesthesiologists. ASA Physical Status Classification System. Available at: . Accessed on 25 May 2016.
    1. Mallampati SR, Gatt SP, Gugino LD, Desai SP, Waraska B, Freiberger D, et al. A clinical sign to predict difficult tracheal intubation: a prospective study. Can Anaesth Soc J. 1985;32(4):429–34. doi: 10.1007/BF03011357.
    1. Frankl S, Shiere F, Fogels H. Should the parent remain with the child in the dental operatory. J Dent Child. 1962;29:150–63.
    1. WHO. World Health Organization . Oral health surveys: basic methods. 5. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.
    1. Ali N, Pruessner JC. The salivary alpha amylase over cortisol ratio as a marker to assess dysregulations of the stress systems. Physiol Behav. 2012;106(1):65–72. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.10.003.
    1. Singh C, Pandey RK, Saksena AK, Chandra G. A comparative evaluation of analgo-sedative effects of oral dexmedetomidine and ketamine: a triple-blind, randomized study. Paediatr Anaesth. 2014;24(12):1252–9. doi: 10.1111/pan.12493.
    1. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria-Executiva. Área de Economia da Saúde e Desenvolvimento. Avaliação de tecnologias em saúde: ferramentas para a gestão do SUS / Ministério da Saúde, Secretaria-Executiva, Área de Economia da Saúde e Desenvolvimento. – Brasília: Ministério da Saúde, 2009.
    1. Gomes HS, Corrêa-Faria P, Silva TA, Paiva SM, Costa PS, Batista AC, et al. Oral midazolam reduces cortisol levels during local anaesthesia in children: a randomised controlled trial. Braz Oral Res. 2015;29(1):1–9.
    1. Leroy PL, Costa LR, Emmanouil D, van Beukering A, Franck LS. Beyond the drugs: nonpharmacologic strategies to optimize procedural care in children. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2016;29(Suppl 1):S1–13. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000312.
    1. Moura LD, Costa PS, Costa LR. How do observational scales correlate the ratings of children’s behavior during pediatric procedural sedation? Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:5248271. doi: 10.1155/2016/5248271.
    1. Feigal RJ. Guiding and managing the child dental patient: a fresh look at old pedagogy. J Dent Educ. 2001;65:1369–77.
    1. Viana KA, Daher A, Maia LC, Costa PS, Martins CC, Paiva SM, et al. Memory effects of sedative drugs in children and adolescents-protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0192-x.
    1. Lima ARA, Medeiros M, Costa LR. Mothers’ perception about pediatric dental sedation as an alternative to dental general anesthesia. RGO. Rev Gauch Odontol. 2015;63(2):153–60. doi: 10.1590/1981-863720150002000032843.
    1. Burnett HF, Lambley R, West SK, Ungar WJ, Mireskandari K. Cost-effectiveness analysis of clinic-based choral hydrate sedation versus general anaesthesia for paediatric ophtalmological procedures. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(11):1565–70. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-306604.
    1. Ashley PF, Williams CE, Moles DR, Parry J. Sedation versus general anaesthesia for provision of dental treatment to patients younger than 18 years. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;9:CD006334.
    1. Johansson J, Sjöberg J, Nordgren M, Sandström E, Sjöberg F, Zetterström H. Prehospital analgesia using nasal administration of S-ketamine—a case series. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013;21:38. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-21-38.
    1. Shanmugaavel AK, Asokan S, Baby JJ, Priya G, Gnana DJ. Comparison of behavior and dental anxiety during intranasal and sublingual midazolam sedation—a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016;40(1):81–7. doi: 10.17796/1053-4628-40.1.81.
    1. Sunbul N, Delvi MB, Zahrani TA, Salama F. Buccal versus intranasal midazolam sedation for pediatric dental patients. Pediatr Dent. 2014;36(7):483–8.
    1. Tyagi P, Tyagi S, Jain A. Sedative effects of oral midazolam, intravenous midazolam and oral diazepam in the dental treatment of children. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2013;37(3):301–5. doi: 10.17796/jcpd.37.3.6u482603r0388558.
    1. Merkel SI, Voepel-Lewis T, Shayevitz JR, Malviya S. The FLACC: a behavioral scale for scoring postoperative pain in young children. Pediatr Nurs. 1997;23(3):293–7.
    1. Crellin DJ, Harrison D, Santamaria N, Babl FE. Systematic review of the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability Scale for assessing pain in infants and children: is it reliable, valid, and feasible for use? Pain. 2015;156(11):2132–51. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000305.
    1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the role of authors and contributors. Available in: . Accessed on 18 March 2017.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe