Comparison of intranasal midazolam with intravenous diazepam for treating febrile seizures in children: prospective randomised study
Eli Lahat
Abstract
Open-access reader
Eli Lahat
Abstract
Open-access reader
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of midazolam given intranasally with diazepam given intravenously in the treatment of children with prolonged febrile seizures. DESIGN: Prospective randomised study. SETTING: Paediatric emergency department in a general hospital. SUBJECTS: 47 children aged six months to five years with prolonged febrile seizure (at least 10 minutes) during a 12 month period. INTERVENTIONS: Intranasal midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) and intravenous diazepam (0.3 mg/kg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time from arrival at hospital to starting treatment and cessation of seizures. RESULTS: Intranasal midazolam and intravenous diazepam were equally effective. Overall, 23 of 26 seizures were controlled with midazolam and 24 out of 26 with diazepam. The mean time from arrival at hospital to starting treatment was significantly shorter in the midazolam group (3.5 (SD 1.8) minutes, 95% confidence interval 3.3 to 3.7) than the diazepam group (5.5 (2.0), 5.3 to 5.7). The mean time to control of seizures was significantly sooner (6.1 (3.6), 6.3 to 6.7) in the midazolam group than the diazepam group (8.0 (0.5), 7. 9 to 8.3). No significant side effects were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: Seizures were controlled more quickly with intravenous diazepam than with intranasal midazolam, although midazolam was as safe and effective as diazepam. The overall time to cessation of seizures after arrival at hospital was faster with intranasal midazolam than with intravenous diazepam. The intranasal route can possibly be used not only in medical centres but in general practice and, with appropriate instructions, by families of children with recurrent febrile seizures at home.
OpenAlex reports 295 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of midazolam given intranasally with diazepam given intravenously in the treatment of children with prolonged febrile seizures. DESIGN: Prospective randomised study. SETTING: Paediatric emergency department in a general hospital. SUBJECTS: 47 children aged six months to five years with prolonged febrile seizure (at least 10 minutes) during a 12 month period. INTERVENTIONS: Intranasal midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) and intravenous diazepam (0.3 mg/kg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time from arrival at hospital to starting treatment and cessation of seizures. RESULTS: Intranasal midazolam and intravenous diazepam were equally effective. Overall, 23 of 26 seizures were controlled with midazolam and 24 out of 26 with diazepam. The mean time from arrival at hospital to starting treatment was significantly shorter in the midazolam group (3.5 (SD 1.8) minutes, 95% confidence interval 3.3 to 3.7) than the diazepam group (5.5 (2.0), 5.3 to 5.7). The mean time to control of seizures was significantly sooner (6.1 (3.6), 6.3 to 6.7) in the midazolam group than the diazepam group (8.0 (0.5), 7. 9 to 8.3). No significant side effects were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: Seizures were controlled more quickly with intravenous diazepam than with intranasal midazolam, although midazolam was as safe and effective as diazepam. The overall time to cessation of seizures after arrival at hospital was faster with intranasal midazolam than with intravenous diazepam. The intranasal route can possibly be used not only in medical centres but in general practice and, with appropriate instructions, by families of children with recurrent febrile seizures at home.
Key concepts: Diazepam, Midazolam, Medicine, Anesthesia, Nasal administration, Randomized controlled trial, Prospective cohort study, Surgery