Intravenous midazolam infusion for sedation of infants in the neonatal intensive care unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Proper sedation for neonates undergoing uncomfortable procedures may reduce stress and avoid complications. Midazolam is a short-acting benzodiazepine that is increasingly used in neonatal intensive care units (NICU). However, its effectiveness as a sedative in neonates has not been systematically evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether intravenous midazolam infusion is an effective sedative, as evaluated by behavioural or physiological measurements, or both, for critically ill neonates undergoing intensive care and to assess clinically significant short- and long-term adverse effects associated with its use. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a literature search according to the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group search strategy. Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of intravenous midazolam use in neonates were identified by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2012), MEDLINE (1985 to 2012), EMBASE (1980 to 2012), CINAHL (1981 to 2012), reference lists of published studies, personal files, and abstracts published in The Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting Abstract Archives from 1990 to 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of intravenous midazolam infusion in infants aged 28 days or less for sedation were selected for review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data regarding the primary outcome of level of sedation were abstracted. Secondary outcomes such as intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), death, length of NICU stay, and adverse effects associated with midazolam were assessed. When appropriate, meta-analyses were performed using risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), along with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for categorical variables and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials were included in the review. Using different sedation scales, each study showed a statistically significantly higher sedation level in the midazolam group compared to the placebo group. However, since none of the sedation scales used have been validated in preterm infants, the effectiveness of midazolam in this population could not be ascertained. One study showed a statistically significant higher incidence of adverse neurological events (death, grade III or IV IVH, PVL), and meta-analysis of data from two studies showed a statistically significant longer duration of NICU stay in the midazolam group compared to the placebo group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are insufficient data to promote the use of intravenous midazolam infusion as a sedative for neonates undergoing intensive care. This review raises concerns about the safety of midazolam in neonates. Further research on the effectiveness and safety of midazolam in neonates is needed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".