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

No abstract available.
Child ; Humans ; Midazolam

No abstract available.
Endoscopy ; Humans ; Midazolam ; Propofol

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*

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

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

No abstract available.
Epilepsia Partialis Continua ; Hemolysis ; Midazolam

BACKGROUND: This study examined the effects of midazolam on the propofol-induced involuntary movements, pain on injection, the maintenance dose of propofol, and recovery characteristics. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized study, 30 children (2 8 yr of age, ASA physical status I or II) undergoing short duration of ENT procedures received midazolam 0.06 mg/kg (Group M) or an equal volume of placebo (Group P) intravenously 3 min before the injection of propofol. At induction of anesthesia an independent anesthesiologist graded the incidence, severity of involuntary movements, and pain on injection. RESULTS: Both groups were similar in age, sex, weight, propofol dose, duration of surgery and anesthesia. Incidence of involuntary movements showed no significant difference between two groups. But, there were significant difference in severity between two groups (P < 0.05). There was significant decrease in pain on injection in group M than group P and no significant differences in open eyes on command, time to extubation and time to discharge. CONCLUSION: Our result demonstrated that midazolam 60 microgram/kg compared with placebo did not reduce the incidence of involuntary movement, but reduced the severity of involuntary movement without delayed recovery. And there was significant reduction of pain on injection in midazolam 60 microgram/kg administration.
Anesthesia ; Child ; Dyskinesias* ; Humans ; Incidence ; Midazolam* ; Propofol

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

Propofol is widely used for supportive sedation in local and regional anaesthesia in plastic surgical procedure. We studied comparative effect of propofol comparing fontanel and midazolam that was previously used. From April 2003 to July 2005, 118 patients were reviewed whom propofol was used intravenous sedation in various plastic surgical procedures. In some cases, midazolam were used initially then converted to propofol. Patients were questioned for their satisfaction in group of propofol alone and midazoline and propofol combination. Vital sign(Blood pressure, Respiration rate) and O2 saturaion, sedation time, side effect and subjective satisfaction were evaluated. The result reveals that propofol is effective medicine for supplement intravenous sedative medicine for plastic surgeries especially when it was used with combination of midazolam.
Humans ; Midazolam ; Propofol* ; Respiration ; Surgery, Plastic*