| Title |
Intranasal Dexmedetomidine for Procedural Sedation in Children, a Suitable Alternative to Chloral Hydrate
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Drugs, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40272-017-0217-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Giorgio Cozzi, Stefania Norbedo, Egidio Barbi |
| Abstract |
Sedation is often required for children undergoing diagnostic procedures. Chloral hydrate has been one of the sedative drugs most used in children over the last 3 decades, with supporting evidence for its efficacy and safety. Recently, chloral hydrate was banned in Italy and France, in consideration of evidence of its carcinogenicity and genotoxicity. Dexmedetomidine is a sedative with unique properties that has been increasingly used for procedural sedation in children. Several studies demonstrated its efficacy and safety for sedation in non-painful diagnostic procedures. Dexmedetomidine's impact on respiratory drive and airway patency and tone is much less when compared to the majority of other sedative agents. Administration via the intranasal route allows satisfactory procedural success rates. Studies that specifically compared intranasal dexmedetomidine and chloral hydrate for children undergoing non-painful procedures showed that dexmedetomidine was as effective as and safer than chloral hydrate. For these reasons, we suggest that intranasal dexmedetomidine could be a suitable alternative to chloral hydrate. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 24% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 57% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,536,772
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Drugs
#460
of 557 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,116
of 308,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Drugs
#11
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 557 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.