MedPath

IN Dexmedetomidine for Procedural Sedation in Pediatric Closed Reductions for Distal Forearm Fractures

Early Phase 1
Conditions
Conscious Sedation
Distal Radius Fracture
Interventions
Registration Number
NCT03466242
Lead Sponsor
Phoenix Children's Hospital
Brief Summary

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the sedative, and analgesic effects of intranasal (IN) Dexmedetomidine (DEX) in children presenting to a Pediatric Emergency Department (PED) who undergo conscious sedation for reduction of closed distal forearm fractures when compared to those receiving intravenous (IV) Ketamine. The secondary objective is to compare each sedation technique for safety and procedural outcomes.

Detailed Description

Distal Forearm fractures are often are displaced requiring conscious sedation for closed reduction in the Emergency Department. Our institution's current standard of care consists of IN Fentanyl for baseline control of pain, and for those fractures requiring reduction; typically IV Ketamine is utilized. Ketamine is typically well tolerated but is not without concerns including hypertension, vomiting, and the rare but serious complication of laryngospasm. Dexmedetomidine (DEX) offers a possible alternative to IV Ketamine. DEX has been used safely in the critical care setting for both pediatrics and adults. It has been well documented as being quite effective in sedation, amnesia and analgesia. Using IN DEX for PED procedural sedation has the potential to obviate the need for IV placement and may offer a better conscious sedation profile than Ketamine with respect to sedation, analgesia, and adverse outcomes.

Our overall project would be to assess the efficiency of IN DEX in comparison to IV Ketamine, for proper sedation and analgesic coverage for children undergoing closed reduction of distal forearm fractures.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
UNKNOWN
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
40
Inclusion Criteria

Verbal children aged 2-18 with a single extremity displaced forearm fracture requiring conscious sedation and reduction will be screened for enrollment.

Exclusion Criteria
  1. Under age 2 years old or patients > 18 years old
  2. Multiple Fractures
  3. Significant multisystem trauma
  4. Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS < 15)
  5. Complex fractures that aren't deemed reducible in ED
  6. Reported Allergy to Alpha -2-agonists
  7. Pregnancy
  8. Intoxication
  9. Baseline Hypotension as < 70mm Hg + 2 x age or < 90mm Hg for patients > 11 years of age
  10. Patients with prior reductions attempted at outside facilities
  11. Aberrant nasal anatomy that precludes IN medications
  12. Chronic Health issues that can affect DEX metabolism
  13. History of adverse reactions to anesthesia
  14. Patients transferred from outside facilities
  15. Open fractures

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
IV KetamineKetamineEvaluate sedative and analgesic effects of Intravenous Ketamine (1mg/kg)
Intranasal DexmedetomidineDexmedetomidineEvaluate sedative and analgesic effects of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine (1-2ug/kg)
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Evaluate the analgesic effects of intranasal Dexmedetomidine in children undergoing conscious sedation for closed distal forearm fracture reduction compared to intravenous Ketamine12 months

The analgesic effects of intranasal Dexmedetomidine will be compared to intravenous ketamine for conscious sedation using either the Wong-Baker scale (FACES) or Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) depending on patient age and developmental status

Evaluate the sedative effects of intranasal Dexmedetomidine in children undergoing conscious sedation for closed distal forearm fracture reduction compared to intravenous Ketamine12 months

The sedative effects of intranasal Dexmedetomidine will be compared to intravenous ketamine for conscious sedation via the Michigan Sedation Scoring (MSS) system.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Compare each sedation technique for length of ED stay12 months

Time in minutes and seconds from presentation to ED to discharge

Compare each sedation technique for length of sedation12 months

Time in minutes and seconds from when Michigan Sedation Scoring (MSS) is 3 or higher until MSS is less than 3.

Compare each sedation technique for procedural success rate12 months

Describe the successful reduction of orthopedic injuries in each study arm. Successful reduction defined as patient able to be discharged and not requiring admission, surgery, or secondary reduction attempts.

Compare each sedation technique for need for additional doses of medications for analgesia or sedation12 months

Will measure if any unplanned doses of sedatives or analgesics are required in either treatment arm.

Compare each sedation technique for rate of vomiting12 months

Describe the incidence (yes/no) of vomiting at any point after administration of either study drug to ED discharge.

Compare each sedation technique for need for respiratory interventions12 months

Measure if any respiratory interventions were required during the patient's ED stay. Respiratory interventions defined as need for oxygen by any device.

Compare each sedation technique for time to sedation onset12 months

Time in minutes and seconds from administration of sedative agent until Michigan Sedation Scoring (MSS) is 3 or higher.

Compare each sedation technique for Vital sign abnormalities12 months

Review vital signs following administration of either study drug to see if any vital signs were abnormal. Abnormal vital signs will be defined as hear rate, respiratory rate, or blood pressure above or below one standard deviation for age derived norms.

Compare each sedation technique for patient family satisfaction12 months

Describe the family satisfaction with each conscious sedation technique. Measured by brief survey given to the family upon consent for the study.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Phoenix Children's Hospital

🇺🇸

Phoenix, Arizona, United States

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath