Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Pediatr Emerg Care ; 23(3): 158-62, 2007 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17413431

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Intravenous (IV) ketamine has gained widespread use in the emergency department (ED) for procedural sedation. The most commonly recommended starting dose is 1.5 mg/kg. We examined whether lower doses of ketamine in the range of 0.5 to 1.0 mg/kg could successfully sedate pediatric patients. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed quality assurance data of patients sedated with IV ketamine in a pediatric ED. Patients were administered 0.02 mg/kg of IV atropine, 0.05 mg/kg of IV midazolam, and then 0.5 mg/kg of IV ketamine. Additional aliquots of 0.25 to 0.5 mg/kg of ketamine were given as necessary, to a maximum of 2.0 mg/kg. Efficacy of sedation was assessed after every dose by pediatric emergency medicine attendings or fellows. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients had quality assurance forms completed. The total ketamine dose administered ranged from 0.5 to 2 mg/kg. Adequate procedural sedation was obtained for 70 (97%) of 72 patients. Forty-four percent of patients required 0.75 mg/kg or less of ketamine to obtain adequate initial sedation; 25% of subjects required only 0.5 mg/kg; 43% of patients required 1.0 mg/kg of IV ketamine. We found that 88% of our patients could be successfully sedated at initial doses of 1 mg/kg or less. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests a potential role for low-dose IV ketamine in the range of 0.5 to 1.0 mg/kg for pediatric procedural sedation. Most pediatric ED patients can be successfully sedated with 1 mg/kg of ketamine.


Asunto(s)
Hipnóticos y Sedantes/administración & dosificación , Ketamina/administración & dosificación , Adolescente , Atropina/administración & dosificación , Niño , Preescolar , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Evaluación de Medicamentos , Interacciones Farmacológicas , Femenino , Humanos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/efectos adversos , Hipoxia/inducido químicamente , Lactante , Inyecciones Intravenosas , Ketamina/efectos adversos , Masculino , Trastornos Mentales/inducido químicamente , Midazolam/administración & dosificación , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud , Estudios Retrospectivos , Vómitos/inducido químicamente
2.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med ; 158(2): 113-8, 2004 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-14757602

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To determine if nebulized epinephrine is more efficacious than nebulized albuterol in the emergency department (ED) treatment of moderately ill infants with bronchiolitis. METHODS: Sixty-six patients between 0 and 12 months of age with new-onset wheezing, an antecedent upper respiratory tract infection, and a clinical score (Respiratory Distress Assessment Instrument) of 8 to 15 were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either 0.9 mg/kg of nebulized 2.25% racemic epinephrine (n = 34) or 0.15 mg/kg of nebulized 0.5% albuterol sulfate (n = 32) at 0, 30, and 60 minutes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were clinical score and respiratory rate. Secondary outcome measures were room air oxygen saturation, elapsed time to meeting clinical criteria for ED discharge, hospitalization rate, and proportion of patients relapsed within 72 hours of ED discharge (relapse rate). RESULTS: Both treatment groups experienced a similar pattern of change in mean clinical score, respiratory rate, and room air saturation over time. There were no significant differences between the groups by these same measures at any time. The median time at which infants were well enough for ED discharge was 90 minutes in the epinephrine-treated group vs 120 minutes in the albuterol-treated group (P =.01). Sixteen infants (47.1%) in the epinephrine-treated group were hospitalized compared with 12 infants (37.5%) in the albuterol-treated group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-2.22). Relapse rate was 18.8% (3/16) in the epinephrine-treated group and 42.1% (8/19) in the albuterol-treated group (relative risk, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-1.41). Adverse effects occurred infrequently. CONCLUSIONS: Although the patients treated with epinephrine were judged well enough for ED discharge significantly earlier than the patients treated with albuterol, epinephrine was not found to be more efficacious than albuterol in treating moderately ill infants with bronchiolitis.


Asunto(s)
Albuterol/uso terapéutico , Bronquiolitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Broncodilatadores/uso terapéutico , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Epinefrina/uso terapéutico , Racepinefrina , Enfermedad Aguda , Administración por Inhalación , Albuterol/administración & dosificación , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Método Doble Ciego , Epinefrina/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Nebulizadores y Vaporizadores , Estudios Prospectivos , Estadísticas no Paramétricas , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA