19 Anxiolysis for laceration repair in children: A survey of pediatric emergency providers in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Primary Subject area Emergency Medicine - Paediatric Background Laceration repair accounts for half of procedures performed in pediatric emergency departments. Although commonly used, topical anesthetics do little to alleviate emotional distress, particularly in young children. Intranasal midazolam is frequently used but is not consistently effective. Intranasal dexmedetomidine (IND) is a new and potentially effective anxiolytic but clinical uptake is limited by a lack of pediatric data. Objectives Our objective was to understand pediatric emergency providers’ willingness, preferences, and perceived barriers surrounding anxiolysis for laceration repair in children, to inform the design of a future clinical trial of IND. Design/Methods This was an online survey of Canadian pediatric emergency providers listed in the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada database. The survey was developed according to published guidelines and featured a vignette of a 3-year-old distressed child requiring laceration repair. It was hosted on the Research Electronic Data Capture platform in English and French, and was disseminated from September to December 2020. The primary outcome was the proportion of respondents that would provide anxiolysis. Secondary outcomes included perceived barriers to IND use. Data were reported using summary statistics. Results The response rate was 155/225 (68.9%), of which 98/141 (70%) were Royal College accredited pediatric emergency physicians. For 129/147 (88%) of respondents, 80-100% of their patients were children. 123/146 (84%) had > 6 years independent practice experience and 126/146 (86%) performed > 4 laceration repairs per month. 127/148 (86%) believed that > 25% of children experienced distress significant enough to require physical restraint during laceration repair. 116/148 (78%) indicated they would provide anxiolysis, mainly as intranasal benzodiazepines, such as midazolam (100/109, 92%). 95/148 (64%) indicated that they would consider IND if evidence suggested it was effective. Common perceived barriers included inadequate personal (114/145, 79%) and nursing (109/145, 75%) experience with IND, and lack of formulary access to IND (60/145, 41%). Conclusion Most pediatric emergency providers believe that laceration repair in a young child is distressing and would provide anxiolysis. Most providers would consider IND if there was evidence of benefit, suggesting that favourable findings from a clinical trial would have good clinical uptake.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".