1.Adverse Drug Reaction with Midazolam Use in Emergency Department
Nik Muhamad NA ; Ismail AK ; Kaharuddin H ; Miao Ching H ; Qamarul Ariffin S ; Syazwani azwa S ; Nazurah MS
Medicine and Health 2016;11(1):2-10
Midazolam is one of the most commonly used drugs for sedation in Emergency
Department (ED). This was a retrospective study conducted on 380 patients from December 2012 to May 2014 in ED of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical
Centre (UKMMC). The objective was to elicit the frequency of side effects and
correlation to various factors i.e. socio-demography, co-morbidities, age groups
and underlying illnesses. Out of 380 patients, 35 patients experienced side effects
(20 patients with midazolam alone, 15 patients with combination of drugs). The
average age was 42 years and the average dose of midazolam was 3.5mg. The
most common other drug combined was fentanyl. The overall complication rate
for midazolam was 5.3%. The most common side effect recorded was excessive
somnolence (1.6%). Other side effects included local skin reactions (1.1%), vomiting
(0.8%), headache (0.8%) and hypotension (0.5%). There was no significant
association between the socio-demographic factors and drugs combination with
the side effects of midazolam on patients. It was concluded that midazolam was a
safe drug due to absence of any life-threatening side effects. There are possibilities
that most side effects recorded could be caused by other comfounding factors e.g.
underlying injuries or disease and combination with other drugs.
Midazolam
4.The Effects of Intranasal Midazolam on Preanesthetic Sedation in Children.
Young Ju KIM ; Cheoel Oh KIM ; Yoon Hee KIM ; Soo Chang SON
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology 1997;33(4):627-632
BACKGROUNDS: This study was performed to determine the onset time and dose of intranasal midazolam used for preanesthetic sedation in children. METHODS: The children were randomly allocated to recieve one of three medications via the nasal route in a double blind manner. Group I: patients were given normal saline 0.2 ml/5kg, Group II: patients were given midazolam 0.2 mg/kg, Group III: patients were given midazolam 0.3 mg/kg. RESULTS: The cardiovascular and SpO2 changes were not significantly different among the patients of the three groups. The sedation score was greater in group II compared with group I from 5 minute after administration (1.9 vs 2.7, p<0.05). postanesthetic recovery score (PARS) was not significantly different among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that intranasal midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) produces anxiolysis and sedation in children with rapid onset.
Child*
;
Humans
;
Midazolam*
5.Comparison of Midazolam Alone versus Midazolam Plus Propofol during Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.
Young Shim CHO ; Euikeun SEO ; Jung Ho HAN ; Soon Man YOON ; Hee Bok CHAE ; Seon Mee PARK ; Sei Jin YOUN
Clinical Endoscopy 2011;44(1):22-26
BACKGROUND/AIMS: For proper sedation during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), propofol has been widely used. This study aimed to compare the levels of sedation and tolerance of patients treated with midazolam (M group) and a combination of midazolam and propofol (MP group) during ESD. METHODS: A total of 44 consecutive patients undergoing ESD were randomly assigned to the two groups. In the M group, 2 mg of midazolam was given repeatedly to maintain after a loading dose of 5 mg. The MP group initially received 5 mg of midazolam and 20 mg of propofol. Then, we increased the dosage of propofol by 20 mg gradually. RESULTS: The average amount of midazolam was 12 mg in the M group. In the M group, 10 patients were given propofol additionally, since they failed to achieve proper sedation. The average amount of propofol was 181 mg in the MP group. Procedure time, vital signs and rates of complications were not significantly different between two groups. Movement of patients and discomfort were lower in the MP group. CONCLUSIONS: During ESD, treatment with propofol and a low dose of midazolam for sedation provides greater satisfaction for endoscopists compared to midazolam alone.
Humans
;
Midazolam
;
Propofol
;
Vital Signs
6.Comparison of Midazolam Alone versus Midazolam Plus Propofol during Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.
Young Shim CHO ; Euikeun SEO ; Jung Ho HAN ; Soon Man YOON ; Hee Bok CHAE ; Seon Mee PARK ; Sei Jin YOUN
Clinical Endoscopy 2011;44(1):22-26
BACKGROUND/AIMS: For proper sedation during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), propofol has been widely used. This study aimed to compare the levels of sedation and tolerance of patients treated with midazolam (M group) and a combination of midazolam and propofol (MP group) during ESD. METHODS: A total of 44 consecutive patients undergoing ESD were randomly assigned to the two groups. In the M group, 2 mg of midazolam was given repeatedly to maintain after a loading dose of 5 mg. The MP group initially received 5 mg of midazolam and 20 mg of propofol. Then, we increased the dosage of propofol by 20 mg gradually. RESULTS: The average amount of midazolam was 12 mg in the M group. In the M group, 10 patients were given propofol additionally, since they failed to achieve proper sedation. The average amount of propofol was 181 mg in the MP group. Procedure time, vital signs and rates of complications were not significantly different between two groups. Movement of patients and discomfort were lower in the MP group. CONCLUSIONS: During ESD, treatment with propofol and a low dose of midazolam for sedation provides greater satisfaction for endoscopists compared to midazolam alone.
Humans
;
Midazolam
;
Propofol
;
Vital Signs
7.A Case of Transient Hemolysis Caused by Midazolam.
Hyeri PARK ; Dong Seok GWAK ; Hong Kyun PARK ; Kyeong Joon KIM ; Seong Ho PARK
Journal of the Korean Neurological Association 2011;29(4):404-405
No abstract available.
Epilepsia Partialis Continua
;
Hemolysis
;
Midazolam
8.A COMPARISON OF MIDAZOLAM AND DIAZEPAM AS SEDATIVES FOR AMBULATORY PLASTIC SURGERY PATIENTS.
Yong Chan CHUN ; Hyun Cheol PARK ; Sung Ho CHOI
Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 1997;24(6):1274-1282
No abstract available.
Diazepam*
;
Humans
;
Hypnotics and Sedatives*
;
Midazolam*
;
Surgery, Plastic*
9.The Influence of Unilateral Spinal Anesthesia and Conventional Spinal Anesthesia on Sensitivity to Midazolam Sedation.
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology 2005;48(1):39-44
BACKGROUND: Spinal anesthesia potentiates sedative drug effects. We speculated that an acute decrease in tonic afferent input by spinal anesthesia would decrease the level of consciousness and thereby increase susceptibility to sedative drugs. The experiments were approached with the assumption that the amount of sedative would reduce in the following order: first, the group without spinal anesthesia, second, the group with unilateral spinal anesthesia, and third, the group with conventional spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Patients in group 1 (n = 20) were given midazolam without spinal anesthesia and patients in group 2 (n = 20) received unilateral spinal anesthesia. Those patients who after 20 minutes had a sensory level of T9-11 and a motor block of 3 in dependent side, no sensory block, and a motor block of 0 in the non-dependent side were included. In group 3 (n = 20), patients received conventional spinal anesthesia, and those patients who after 20 minutes had a sensory level of T9-11 and a motor block of 3 were included. The amount of midazolam administered at 33microgram/kg/min to a Bispectral Index score (BIS) of 80 was measured. RESULTS: The dose of midazolam administered to a BIS of 80 was significantly lower in group 3 than in group 1 or group 2. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of sedatives was in the following order: the group with conventional spinal anesthesia, the group with unilateral spinal anesthesia, and the group not administered spinal anesthesia.
Anesthesia, Spinal*
;
Consciousness
;
Humans
;
Hypnotics and Sedatives
;
Midazolam*
10.Relationship between bispectral index (bis), sedation score and plasma concentration for evaluation of monitoring effect of bispectral index in midazolam sedation.
Eun Jin PARK ; Kwang Won YUM ; Eun Seok KIM ; Hyun Jeong KIM
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2003;29(3):169-172
PURPOSE: We examined the relationship between BIS, sedation score and plasma midazolam concentration to verify the usefulness of BIS to assess the patient's consciousness during sedation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five young, healthy adult volunteers participated in this clinical study. Midazolam was administered intravenously up to 0.08 mg/kg to induce unconsciousness and we monitored the patient's physiological and conscious status until complete recovery from sedation. BIS and sedation score were measured before sedation, 10, 20, 30 minutes after midazolam administration. Plasma midazolam concentration was measured 10 minutes after midazolam administration. BIS was measured using A-2000 BISTM monitor (Aspect Medical Systems, USA) and the degree of sedation was evaluated with the sedation score. RESULTS: The BIS score correlated with the sedation score (r = 0.676, P < 0.05). With the decreased plasma midazolam concentration, the correlation was better with sedation score(r = -0.656).Although BIS values did not correlate with calculated plasma concentration of midazolam (r = 0.467) at 10 minutes after midazolam administration, values after sedation were well distinguished from those before sedation. CONCLUSIONS: BIS is known for an effective predictor of patient's hypnotic state, and it is correlated with the sedation score. But, it doesn't always coincide with the clinical parameters of depth of sedation. So more attention is needed using BIS only during sedation, and it is advisable that the patient's consciousness is monitored with variable sedation score systems every several minutes.
Adult
;
Consciousness
;
Humans
;
Midazolam*
;
Plasma*
;
Unconsciousness
;
Volunteers