Intravenous sedation in pediatric dentistry using midazolam, nalbuphine and droperidol.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this pilot investigation was to study the efficacy, physiologic responses, and safety of a multi-drug intravenous conscious sedation technique in an outpatient setting in children who demonstrated uncooperative behavior when comprehensive restorative dental treatment was attempted. METHODS: Using a time-based sedation record, the physiologic responses of 153 healthy children, age range 23 months to 14.5 years, were measured after they had received midazolam (Versed), nalbuphine (Nubain), and droperidol (Inapsine), each administered intravenously, and nitrous oxide and oxygen administered by nasal mask, while each child received comprehensive restorative or surgical dental care. Each patient was monitored according to the American Academy of Pediatrics Sedation Guidelines. Heart rate and rhythm, blood pressure, respiratory rate, hemoglobin oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, level of sedation, and behavioral responses were recorded preoperatively, at 5 minute intervals during treatment and in recovery until discharge. Sedation was titrated to Level 2 or 3 during treatment as defined by the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry Reference Manual. RESULTS: For each child, the sedation level was judged to be either acceptable or optimal for the completion of all planned dental treatment. There were no sedation failures. Children under 20 kg required significantly higher dosages of each sedative medication than children more than 20 kg to achieve the same level of sedation (P < 0.001, ANOVA). There were no episodes of intraoperative vomiting, hypotension, cardiac arrhythmias, respiratory depression requiring respiratory support, or dysphoria during treatment, in the recovery period, or after discharge. CONCLUSION: This multi-drug intravenous conscious sedation technique is a safe and effective method to control the behavior of uncooperative children who require comprehensive dental treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".