2013PubMedOpen access

Sleep Inducing for EEG Recording in Children: A Comparison between Oral Midazolam and Chloral Hydrate.

Mahmoud Reza Ashrafi, Reza Azizi Malamiri, Gholam Reza Zamani, Mahmoud Mohammadi, Firozeh Hosseini

Open full text 15 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Electroencephalography (EEG) recording is a long duration procedure that needs patient's cooperation for device setup and performing the procedure. Many children lose their cooperation during this procedure. Therefore, sedation and sleep are frequently induced using a few agents as pre procedure medication in children before EEG recording. We aimed to compare the sedative effects of oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate before the procedure along with their impacts on EEG recording in children. MATERIALS & METHODS: A randomized trial was carried out to compare the sedative effects of oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate and their impacts on EEG recording in children. A total of 198 children (100 in the midazolam group and 98 in the chloral hydrate group) were enrolled in the study and randomly allocated to receive either oral moidazolam or chloral hydrate. RESULTS: Oral midazolam had superiority neither in sleep onset latency nor in sleep duration when compared to chloral hydrate. Moreover, the yield of epileptiform discharges in the chloral hydrate group was more than the midazolam group. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that both chloral hydrate 5% (one ml/kg) and oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) could be administered as a pre medication agent for EEG recording in children. However, oral midazolam at this dose had no advantage compared with chloral hydrate.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: Electroencephalography (EEG) recording is a long duration procedure that needs patient's cooperation for device setup and performing the procedure. Many children lose their cooperation during this procedure. Therefore, sedation and sleep are frequently induced using a few agents as pre procedure medication in children before EEG recording. We aimed to compare the sedative effects of oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate before the procedure along with their impacts on EEG recording in children. MATERIALS & METHODS: A randomized trial was carried out to compare the sedative effects of oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate and their impacts on EEG recording in children. A total of 198 children (100 in the midazolam group and 98 in the chloral hydrate group) were enrolled in the study and randomly allocated to receive either oral moidazolam or chloral hydrate. RESULTS: Oral midazolam had superiority neither in sleep onset latency nor in sleep duration when compared to chloral hydrate. Moreover, the yield of epileptiform discharges in the chloral hydrate group was more than the midazolam group. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that both chloral hydrate 5% (one ml/kg) and oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) could be administered as a pre medication agent for EEG recording in children. However, oral midazolam at this dose had no advantage compared with chloral hydrate.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 15 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: Electroencephalography (EEG) recording is a long duration procedure that needs patient's cooperation for device setup and performing the procedure. Many children lose their cooperation during this procedure. Therefore, sedation and sleep are frequently induced using a few agents as pre procedure medication in children before EEG recording. We aimed to compare the sedative effects of oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate before the procedure along with their impacts on EEG recording in children. MATERIALS & METHODS: A randomized trial was carried out to compare the sedative effects of oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate and their impacts on EEG recording in children. A total of 198 children (100 in the midazolam group and 98 in the chloral hydrate group) were enrolled in the study and randomly allocated to receive either oral moidazolam or chloral hydrate. RESULTS: Oral midazolam had superiority neither in sleep onset latency nor in sleep duration when compared to chloral hydrate. Moreover, the yield of epileptiform discharges in the chloral hydrate group was more than the midazolam group. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that both chloral hydrate 5% (one ml/kg) and oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) could be administered as a pre medication agent for EEG recording in children. However, oral midazolam at this dose had no advantage compared with chloral hydrate.

Key concepts: Chloral hydrate, Midazolam, Sedation, Anesthesia, Sedative, Medicine, Chloral, Electroencephalography

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Sleep Inducing for EEG Recording in Children: A Comparison between Oral Midazolam and Chloral Hydrate. — Research Paper | ScholarLens