PubMed · 5987381
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
H Kronschwitz. 1966. [Relaxometry. Methods and findings].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5987381/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
UNLABELLED: An IM combination of meperidine, promethazine, and chlorpromazine (DPT) has been given as sedation for pediatric procedures for more than 40 years. We compared this IM combination to oral (PO) ketamine/midazolam in children having cardiac catheterization. A total of 51 children, ages 9 mo to 10 yr, were enrolled and randomized in this double-blinded study. All children received an IM injection at time zero and PO fluid 15 minutes later. We observed acceptance of medication, onset of sedation and sleep, and sedative efficacy. The cardiorespiratory changes were evaluated. Sedation was supplemented with IV propofol as required. Recovery time, parental satisfaction, and patient amnesia were assessed. Ketamine/midazolam given PO was better tolerated (P < 0.0005), had more rapid onset (P < 0.001), and provided superior sedation (P < 0.005). Respiratory rate decreased after IM DPT only. Heart rate and shortening fraction were stable. Oxygen saturation and mean blood pressure decreased minimally in both groups. Supplemental propofol was more frequently required (P < or = 0.02) and in larger doses (P < 0.05) after IM DPT. Parental satisfaction ratings were higher (P < 0.005) and amnesia was more reliably obtained (P = 0.007) with PO ketamine/midazolam. Two patients needed airway support after the PO medication, as did two other patients when PO ketamine/midazolam was supplemented with IV propofol. Although PO ketamine/midazolam provided superior sedation and amnesia compared to IM DPT, this regimen may require the supervision of an anesthesiologist for safe use. IMPLICATIONS: Oral medication can be superior to IM injections for sedating children with congenital heart disease; however, the safety of all medications remains an issue.
UNLABELLED: Most studies use a bolus size of <6 mL of 0.125% bu- pivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) during labor. In this double-blinded, randomized study, we compared the efficacy of a larger bolus injected via a PCEA pump to a conventional PCEA setting. By using a combination of 0.125% bupivacaine with 1:800,000 epinephrine and 0.625 microg/mL sufentanil, the first PCEA setting was typical (4 mL/8 min), whereas the other combined a 12-mL bolus dose and a 25-min lockout interval, i.e., similar maximal hourly dose. Rescue analgesia was provided with 6 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine. Patient satisfaction and pain were scored on verbal and visual analog scales. Data were analyzed from 103 parturients in the 12-mL/25-min group and 100 in the 4-mL/8-min group. In the 12-mL/25-min group, the median pain score on a 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale was lower at 6-cm cervical dilation (1 [range = 0-8] vs 3 [0-8]) and at delivery (1 [0-10] vs 2 [0-10]). Satisfaction was also better (70% vs 38% "excellent" opinions, at 6-cm cervical dilation). Use of the pump (ratio of successful and total demands) was high and similar in both groups. Rescue analgesia was comparable. Doses of analgesics were greater in the 12-mL/25-min group (hourly bupivacaine dose = 13.9 +/- 5.3 [mean+/- SD] vs 9.4 +/- 4.1 mg). No differences were noted between groups for the severity of hypotension, ephedrine requirement, outcome of the delivery, and Apgar scores. IMPLICATIONS: A patient-controlled epidural analgesia setting that allows a parturient to receive an increased analgesic dose improves satisfaction with patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor.