MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415414422 · doi:10.14740/ijcp1010

A Retrospective Review to Determine the Safety of Continuous Dexmedetomidine Infusions on the Inpatient Ward in Pediatric Patients With Acute and Chronic Pain Conditions

2025· review· en· W4415414422 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aubrey Wrona, Sibelle Aurelie Yemele Kitio, Catherine Roth, Sharon Wrona, Joseph D. Tobias

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Clinical Pediatrics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDexmedetomidineSedationDosingRetrospective cohort studyChronic painAdverse effectIntensive care unit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Dexmedetomidine is an α2-adrenergic receptor agonist that has clinical efficacy in various clinical scenarios in infants and children including procedural sedation, prevention of emergence delirium, and sedation during mechanical ventilation. Additional investigation has suggested its utility in various acute pain, chronic pain, and palliative care scenarios. Despite these beneficial properties, many pediatric institutions limit its use to the pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) setting. We present the development of a hospital-based pathway for the administration of dexmedetomidine on the inpatient ward. Additionally, we present preliminary dosing parameters and safety data using dexmedetomidine along this clinical pathway. Methods: This retrospective chart review included patients ≤ 21 years of age who received a dexmedetomidine infusion for the management of acute or chronic pain outside the ICU setting. In addition to demographic data, information collected included the patient’s primary disease process, primary pain etiology, and comorbid conditions. Information to identify adverse effects included the need to stop the infusion, administration of vasoactive medications, provision of airway or respiratory support, or escalation of care with ICU admission or notification of the rapid response team. Results: The study cohort included 26 patients (median age 5 years). The majority of patients (46%) received dexmedetomidine for 1 or 2 days. The most common primary disease conditions were neuroblastoma (n = 12), acute leukemia (n = 6), and sickle cell disease (n = 4). The starting infusion rate was generally 0.1 µg/kg/h, titrated up in 0.05 µg/kg/h increments to a maximum infusion rate of 0.6 µg/kg/h. For hospice patients with an allow natural death (AND) order, the maximum infusion rate was 1 µg/kg/h. Adverse effects (AEs) were reported in 11 patients, with the most common being hypotension (n = 4) and delirium or hallucinations (n = 4). No pharmacologic intervention was required due to AEs. Conclusions: Our preliminary experience supports the safe use of dexmedetomidine infusions outside the ICU setting following a standardized protocol that includes patient selection, dosing parameters, monitoring, and training of physicians and nurses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Clinical PediatricsSame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207