84 Impact of young age on outcomes of emergency department procedural sedation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Procedural sedation in the emergency department (ED) for children undergoing painful procedures is common practice, however little is known about sedation in very young children. Objectives We examined the effect of young age on emergency department sedation outcomes. Design/Methods This is a secondary analysis of an observational cohort study of children 0-18 years undergoing procedural sedation in six pediatric EDs across Canada. We compared presedation state, indication for sedation, medications, sedation efficacy and four main post-sedation outcomes (serious adverse events (SAE), significant interventions, oxygen desaturation and vomiting) between patients who ≤ 2 years with those > 2 years. Pre-sedation state, medications, indication for sedation and time intervals were summarized using frequency and percentage and compared with chi2 test. Logistic regression was used to examine associations between age group and outcomes. Results 6295 patients were included: 5349 (85%) were > 2 years and 946 (15%) were ≤ 2 years. Children ≤2 years were sedated most commonly for laceration repair (n=450; 47.6%), orthopedic reduction (165; 17.4%) and abscess incision and drainage (136; 14.4%). Children >2years were sedated most commonly for orthopedic reductions (3983; 74.5%). Ketamine was the most common medication in both groups, but was used most frequently in children ≤ 2 years (80.9% vs 58.9%; p<0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of SAE, significant interventions or oxygen desaturation between age groups, however, children ≤ 2 years were less likely to vomit (Table 1). Young children had decreased odds of a successful sedation (OR 0.48; 95%CI: 0.37 to 0.63). On average, patients ≤ 2 years were sedated for 7 minutes less (74.1 vs 81.0 p<0.001) and discharged 10 minutes sooner (90.1 vs 100.8 p<0.001). Conclusion Children ≤ 2 years most commonly received ED sedation for laceration repair using ketamine. Young age was not associated with a significant difference in SAEs, significant intervention or desaturation but was associated with decreased odds of vomiting and of successful sedation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".