ADVERTISEMENT

Home|Journals|Articles by Year|Audio Abstracts
 

Original Research

Anaesth. pain intensive care. 2018; 22(1): 16-25


Evaluation of clinical effectiveness of three different sedation protocols (intravenous propofol vs ketamine vs ketofol) in anxious children

Gözde Yalçın, Nurhan Öztaş, Gülay Kip.



Abstract
Download PDF Post

Aim: The aim of this prospective randomised blinded study was to evaluate clinical effectiveness of three different sedation protocols (intravenous propofol vs ketamine vs ketofol) in children scheduled for dental treatment.
Material and Methods: Seventy five ASA I patients, that were randomly selected in 6-12 aged children with -documented- high anxiety level were randomly divided into 3 groups: Ketamine treated group (Grup K) (a priming dose of 1 mg/kg, followed by continuous infusion dose of 50-60 µg/kg/dk), Propofol treated group (Group P) (priming dose of 2 mg/kg, followed by continuous infusion dose of 70-90 µg/kg/dk) and Ketamine plus propofol treated group (Ketofol) (Grup KP) (priming dose of 0,6 mg/kg, followed by continuous infusion dose of 40-60 µg/kg/dk). During the study period vital signs of children, the level of sedation using BIS monitor and time interval needed for full recovery were recorded in every 5 minutes. The levels of changing anxiety were measured using Children's Fear Survey Schedule – Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS) and face version of the Modified Child Dental Anxiety Scale (MCDASf).
Results: Higher complication rates were noted in Ketamine treated group (p

Key words: Intravenous Sedation, Ketofol, Ketamine, Propofol, Anxiety





Bibliomed Article Statistics

12
14
17
14
13
17
13
25
28
37
44
20
R
E
A
D
S

14

13

9

8

11

9

13

24

25

19

78

6
D
O
W
N
L
O
A
D
S
080910111201020304050607
20242025

Full-text options


Share this Article


Online Article Submission
• ejmanager.com




ejPort - eJManager.com
Author Tools
About BiblioMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Bibliomed are open access articles licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.