Combine searches by placing the search numbers in the top search box and pressing the search button. An example search might look like (#1 or #2) and (#3 or #4)
Latest & greatest articles for sedation
The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence. If you wanted the latest trusted evidence on sedation or other clinical topics then use Trip today.
This page lists the very latest high quality evidence on sedation and also the most popular articles. Popularity measured by the number of times the articles have been clicked on by fellow users in the last twelve months.
What is Trip?
Trip is a clinical search engine designed to allow users to quickly and easily find and use high-quality research evidence to support their practice and/or care.
Trip has been online since 1997 and in that time has developed into the internet’s premier source of evidence-based content. Our motto is ‘Find evidence fast’ and this is something we aim to deliver for every single search.
As well as research evidence we also allow clinicians to search across other content types including images, videos, patient information leaflets, educational courses and news.
For further information on Trip click on any of the questions/sections on the left-hand side of this page. But if you still have questions please contact us via firstname.lastname@example.org
Efficacy, safety, and cost of intravenous sedation versus general anesthesia in children undergoing endoscopic procedures Efficacy, safety, and cost of intravenous sedation versus general anesthesia in children undergoing endoscopic procedures Efficacy, safety, and cost of intravenous sedation versus general anesthesia in children undergoing endoscopic procedures Squires R H, Morriss F, Schluterman S, Drews B, Galyen L, Brown K O Record Status This is a critical abstract of an economic (...) evaluation that meets the criteria for inclusion on NHS EED. Each abstract contains a brief summary of the methods, the results and conclusions followed by a detailed critical assessment on the reliability of the study and the conclusions drawn. Health technology Intravenous sedation of general anaesthesia in children undergoing endoscopic procedures. Type of intervention Anaesthesia. Economic study type Cost-effectiveness analysis. Study population Patients under 18 years undergoing an endoscopic
Placebo-controlled trial of midazolam sedation in mechanically ventilated newborn babies. Although midazolam is used for sedation of mechanically ventilated newborn babies, this treatment has not been evaluated in a randomised trial. We have done a prospective placebo-controlled study of the effects of midazolam on haemodynamic variables and sedation as judged by a five-item behaviour score. 46 newborn babies on mechanical ventilation for respiratory distress syndrome were randomly assigned (...) because of inadequate sedation (p < 0.05). Midazolam gave a significantly better sedative effect than placebo, as estimated by the behaviour score (p < 0.05). Heart rate and blood pressure were reduced by treatment but remained within the normal range for gestational age and there was no effect on ventilatory indices. The incidence of complications was similar in the two groups. No midazolam-related side-effects were noted. Continuous infusion of midazolam at doses adapted to gestational age induces
Isoflurane compared with midazolam for sedation in the intensive care unit. To compare isoflurane with midazolam for sedation of ventilated patients.Randomised control study. Setting--Intensive care unit in university teaching hospital.Sixty patients aged 18-76 who required mechanical ventilation.Sedation with either 0.1-0.6% isoflurane in an air-oxygen mixture (30 patients) or a continuous intravenous infusion of midazolam 0.01-0.20 mg/kg/h (30 patients). Sedation was assessed initially (...) and hourly thereafter on a six point scale. Incremental intravenous doses of morphine 0.05 mg/kg were given for analgesia as required. The trial sedative was stopped when the patient was judged ready for weaning from ventilatory support or at 24 hours (whichever was earlier).Achievement of a predetermined level of sedation for as much of the time as possible.Isoflurane produced satisfactory sedation for a greater proportion of time (86%) than midazolam (64%), and patients sedated with isoflurane
Comparison of propofol and midazolam for sedation in critically ill patients. 101 critically ill patients admitted to five intensive-care units were allocated randomly to receive a continuous intravenous infusion of either propofol or midazolam for sedation for up to 24 h. In addition, morphine was given to provide analgesia. The mean duration of infusion was 20.2 h (range 3.0-24.5) in the propofol group and 21.3 h (4.0-47.0) in the midazolam group and infusion rates were 1.77 mg/kg/h (range (...) 0.40-5.00) and 0.10 mg/kg/h (0.01-0.26), respectively. The infusion rates were adjusted as necessary, and the desired level of sedation was achieved easily in most patients in both groups. There were slight falls in arterial pressure, but there were no significant differences between the groups. Heart rate was lower in patients who received propofol. Some small changes occurred in biochemical and haematological variables in both groups, but they were not clinically significant