2022
DOI: 10.1155/2022/7344928
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Nasal Sedation Midazolam Compared with Dexmedetomidine in the Management of Uncooperative Children with Down Syndrome during Dental Treatment

Abstract: Objective. This study aimed to compare the intranasal administration of midazolam and dexmedetomidine in uncooperative children with Down syndrome. Materials and Methods. The sample consisted of 20 children with Down syndrome aged 5 to 11 years who were divided equally into two groups: Group 1 (experimental) nasal dexmedetomidine and Group 2 (control) nasal midazolam. The efficacy of both the drugs was evaluated according to Ohio State University Behavioral Rating Scale (OSUBRS), University of Michigan scale (… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
(15 reference statements)
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some authors suggest that this might be a result of the decrease of the upper airway tone. Nonetheless, limited research suggests that midazolam premedication was not associated with higher incidence of complications in children with obstructive sleep apnea or Down syndrome [53][54][55] .…”
Section: Efficacymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some authors suggest that this might be a result of the decrease of the upper airway tone. Nonetheless, limited research suggests that midazolam premedication was not associated with higher incidence of complications in children with obstructive sleep apnea or Down syndrome [53][54][55] .…”
Section: Efficacymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Source:[15] (This is an open-access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. )…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%