Buccal Versus Intranasal Route of Administration of Midazolam Spray in Behavior Management of Pre-School Patients
- Conditions
- Dental Anxiety
- Interventions
- Registration Number
- NCT04608734
- Lead Sponsor
- Nourhan M.Aly
- Brief 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.
- Detailed Description
Thirty six children fulfilling the requirements of having a dental condition that needed treatment in two dental settings, not exceeding thirty minutes each. They were randomly assigned to one of two groups, according to the treatment offered at the first visit. At the first visit, either buccal or intranasal aerosolized midazolam was administered. At the second visit the alternate route was implemented in a cross-over design with a one week washout period. Vital signs were recorded at baseline and at 5 minutes interval throughout the treatment session.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 36
- Negative and definitely negative behavior according Frankl's scale.
- ASA Group I (normal healthy patient without systemic disease) and II (patient with mild systemic disease) with no medical contraindication which rules out the use of midazolam.
- Children with at least two carious lesions requiring dental intervention in two settings of not more than 30 minute each.
- Children with multiple carious lesions who require treatment under general anesthesia.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- CROSSOVER
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Buccal midazolam Buccal midazolam - Intranasal midazolam Intranasal midazolam -
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Sleep score after 5 minutes This will be assessed using modified Houpt scale for behavior rating:
1. Awake, alert.
2. Drowsy, disoriented.
3. Intermittently asleep.
4. Sound asleep.Crying score after 5 minutes This will be assessed using modified Houpt scale for behavior rating:
1. Hysterical, demands attention.
2. Continuous, making treatment difficult.
3. Intermittent, mild, does not interfere with treatment.
4. No crying present.Head/oral resistance score after 5 minutes This will be assessed using modified Houpt scale for behavior rating:
1. Turns head, refuses to open mouth.
2. Mouth closing, must request to open.
3. Chocking, gagging, spitting.
4. No head/oral resistance present.Overall behavior immediately after completion of the dental treatment procedures This will be assessed using modified Houpt scale for behavior rating:
1. Aborted, no treatment performed.
2. Very poor, treatment interrupted, partial treatment completed.
3. Fair, difficult, all treatment completed.
4. Good, some limited crying or movement.
5. Excellent, no crying or movement.Acceptance of drug administration during the sedation procedure Assessed by a 3 point Likert scale as follows: (1) the child accepted the drug readily. 2 (fair) the child accepted the drug with some resistance. 3 (poor) the child accepted the drug with great resistance. 4 (refused) the child refused but drug administration was possible after persuasion.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University
🇪🇬Alexandria, Egypt