Buccal Versus Intranasal Route of Administration of Midazolam Spray in Behavior Management of Pre-School Patients

Summary

Purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of aerosolized midazolam, introduced through buccal versus intranasal mucosa in managing uncooperative children undergoing dental treatment.

Timeline

Start

2015-06-10

Primary completion

2016-06-13

Completion

2016-06-25

Publications

• Background Chopra R, Marwaha M. Assessment of buccal aerosolized midazolam for pediatric conscious sedation. J Investig Clin Dent. 2015 Feb;6(1):40-4. doi: 10.1111/jicd.12062. Epub 2013 Dec 20.
• Background al-Rakaf H, Bello LL, Turkustani A, Adenubi JO. Intra-nasal midazolam in conscious sedation of young paediatric dental patients. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2001 Jan;11(1):33-40. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-263x.2001.00237.x.
• Background Kupietzky A, Houpt MI. Midazolam: a review of its use for conscious sedation of children. Pediatr Dent. 1993 Jul-Aug;15(4):237-41. No abstract available.
• Background Kupietzky A, Holan G, Shapira J. Intranasal midazolam better at effecting amnesia after sedation than oral hydroxyzine: a pilot study. Pediatr Dent. 1996 Jan-Feb;18(1):32-4.
• Background Primosch RE, Guelmann M. Comparison of drops versus spray administration of intranasal midazolam in two- and three-year-old children for dental sedation. Pediatr Dent. 2005 Sep-Oct;27(5):401-8.
• Background Houpt MI, Weiss NJ, Koenigsberg SR, Desjardins PJ. Comparison of chloral hydrate with and without promethazine in the sedation of young children. Pediatr Dent. 1985 Mar;7(1):41-6. No abstract available.

Drugs

Indications

No indication recorded.