Sedation for Children With Intraoral Injuries in the Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Intraoral procedures (IOPs) are performed within the oral cavity of a spontaneously breathing, deeply sedated child. The objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the safety of sedation for IOP in a pediatric emergency department. METHODS: An unmatched, case-control study was conducted. The records of patients who had an IOP between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2012, were analyzed. We evaluated the rate of serious adverse events during sedation (SAEDS) in patients who had an IOP (case subjects) and in patients who had a closed reduction of a forearm fracture (controls) and compared the 2 cohorts. RESULTS: Forty-one study subjects and 38 controls had complete records. Demographic characteristics were similar for both groups. Cases and controls were treated with the combination of propofol-ketamine for most of the cases (30/41 [73.2%] and 32/38 [84.2%]), and doses were similar between the groups. Study subjects had 5 hypoxic events and 2 apneic events; controls had 4 hypoxic events and 2 apneic events. No aspiration events were recorded. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of SAEDS between the 2 groups (P = 0.55 and P = 0.54, respectively). All SAEDS were successfully managed in the emergency department, and no patient required hospitalization due to an adverse reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this study suggest that when performed by a skilled provider, sedation for an IOP is as safe as sedation for a fracture reduction.
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".