The Effect of Premedication using a Jet-injector in Pediatric Patients.
10.4097/kjae.2007.53.3.291
- Author:
Geon KIM
1
;
Hyo Seok NA
;
Seon Jung KIM
;
Seung Woon LIM
;
Jin Ho BAE
Author Information
1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Korea. jhbae@chungbuk.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
jet-injector;
midazolam;
preanesthetic medication
- MeSH:
Ambulatory Surgical Procedures;
Anesthesia;
Catheters;
Child;
Dihydroergotamine;
Humans;
Inhalation;
Medical Staff;
Midazolam;
Parents;
Preanesthetic Medication;
Premedication*;
Recovery Room;
Thiopental
- From:Korean Journal of Anesthesiology
2007;53(3):291-297
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of midazolam premedication administered by a jet-injector in pediatric patients. METHODS: Children undergoing outpatient surgery were randomized into three groups: intravenous induction with thiopental sodium (control group, n = 20), oral midazolam premedication (PO-med group, n = 20) or midazolam premedication using a jet-injector (Jet-med group, n = 20). In the PO-med and Jet-med group patients, anesthetic induction was performed by sevoflurane inhalation and an intravenous catheter (IVC) was inserted after the children had been anesthetized by sevoflurane inhalation. For the control group patients, an IVC was placed in the preoperative holding area. Agitation scores were recorded in the preoperative holding area and recovery room. Anesthesia times and the views of the medical staff concerning the technique benefits were also noted. Patients and parents were interviewed on the following day. RESULTS: Maximum agitation scores in the preoperative holding area and during separation with parents were significantly lower in the PO-med and Jet-med groups. The induction time was significantly longer in the PO-med and Jet-med groups. No statistically significant differences were found for the recovery characteristics. Though interviews with patients and parents produced similar results for patients in each group, the medical staff satisfaction levels were significantly higher for patients in the PO-med and Jet-med groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that the application of the jet-injector for midazolam premedication may be clinically useful in children who do not have an IVC. The use of the jet-injector could be a substitute for the oral route for midazolam administration.
