search
for
 About Bioline  All Journals  Testimonials  Membership  News


Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences
Piracicaba Dental School - UNICAMP
EISSN: 1677-3225
Vol. 9, Num. 1, 2010, pp. 7-10

Braz J Oral Sci, Vol. 9, No. 1, January-March, 2010, pp. 7-10

Original Article

Intravenous procedural sedation: An alternative in the treatment of patients with intellectual disability

1 Dentist, Special Care Clinic of the Araçatuba Dental School, Unesp - Univ Estadual Paulista, Brazil
2 Postgraduate Student, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Araçatuba Dental School, Unesp - Univ Estadual Paulista, Brazil
3 Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Araçatuba Dental School, Unesp - Univ Estadual Paulista, Brazil

Correspondence Address: Sandra Maria Herondina Coelho Ávila de Aguiar, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba - UNESP, Rua José Bonifácio, 1193 CEP: 16.015-050, Araçatuba - SP, Brazil, saguiar@foa.unesp.br

Date of Submission: 24-Jun-2009
Date of Acceptance: 03-Mar-2010

Code Number: os10002

Abstract

Conscious sedation has become established as an important alternative to general anesthesia (GA) in dental treatment of patients with intellectual disability (ID).
Aim
: to investigate dental patients undergoing sedation using a mean dose of 0.6 mg/kg intravenous midazolam and the adverse events of sedation in patients with ID.
Methods:
This study analyzed the records of 163 dental patients with ID aged between 2 and 76 years who had undergone conscious intravenous sedation (CIV) using a mean dose of 0.61 mg/kg of midazolam at Aragatuba Dental School, Sao Paulo State University, Brazil. The efficacy and complications induced by CIV were evaluated in each subject.
Results:
CIV was effective for dental treatment in 80% of the cases. A total of 626 dental procedures were performed. The mean treatment time was 33.9 minutes. There was statistically significant difference (p<0.05) between absence and presence of adverse reactions. Adverse reactions were observed in 21.47% of the cases.
Conclusions
: The results of this study showed that CIV is a useful method for dental treatment of patients with ID and these patients can need higher doses of sedative to reach an adequate level of sedation.

Keywords: dental anesthesia, dental care, intellectual disability, sedation

Introduction

It has been acknowledged that the population with disabilities has higher rates of poor oral hygiene, gingivitis, and periodontitis than the general population. Moderate or severe gingivitis has been found almost ordinarily, with degree and extent increasing with age and severity of mental retardation [1],[2] . Moreover, special needs patients tend to have more decayed and missing teeth compared to non-disabled patients [3] . An extended series of reports on the use of dental services by children and adults with disabilities focuses on limited physical access to buildings, limited practitioner willingness to provide care, and associated insurance and financial difficulties resulting in longer periods between dental visits and a tendency to have had extractions at the last visit [4],[5] .

Sedation is a useful method for relieving dental fear and anxiety in patients, and it is often essential for people with ID undergoing dental treatment [6] . Benzodiazepines are currently the pharmacological group of choice due to their greater effectiveness provided by their efficacy and safety margin. In addition, muscular relaxant effect of these drugs helps calming the patient down. In this group, midazolam has been efficient in controlling the anxiety and maintaining blood pressure and oxygen saturation within normal levels [7],[8],[9],[10],[11],[12] .

The pharmacological characteristics that made midazolam a drug of choice for clinical sedation are: quick action, short half life and suitable sedation duration. Its anxiolytic, hypnotic and amnesiac effects compose the main objectives to be reached with its utilization. Moreover, the diversity of administration routes (oral, rectal, intramuscular, endovenous and intranasal) offers alternatives that better suits a great number of patients [7],[8],[12],[13] .

Conscious intravenous sedation (CIV) is frequently provided for dental patients as an alternative to GA in the Center of Dental Care to Special Needs Patients of Ararcatuba Dental School, Sao Paulo State University (CAOE/FOA/ UNESP), Brazil. However, the decision about the required dose for an adequate level of sedation is difficult because the effect of sedation cannot be adequately assessed in patients with severe ID. It has been reported that a high dose of sedative is required for patients with ID to obtain an adequate level of sedation [9],[14] , but an appropriate sedative dose has not been satisfactorily established for dental patients with ID. Thus, the authors investigated dental patients undergoing sedation using a medium dose of 0.6 mg/kg intravenous midazolam and the adverse events of sedation in patients with intellectual disability (ID).

Material and methods

One hundred and sixty three mentally handicapped patients were treated under CIV at the CAOE/FOA/UNESP, Brazil between January and July 2003 [Figure - 1].

This treatment was chosen because each patient had previously exhibited combative behavior sufficiently negative to dental treatment using routine behavior management techniques or presented muscular spasticity (cerebral palsy patients). The Research Ethics Committee of Araqatuba Dental School, Sao Paulo State University, Brazil, approved the study (Protocol #FOA 876/2003).

The age of the patients undergoing CIV ranged from 2 to 76 years. Only patients with ASA I or ASA II physical status were eligible for the study. CIV was induced with a bolus intravenous administration of midazolam ranging 0.3 to 1.2 mg/kg for a mean dose of 0.61 mg/kg and all patients were immobilized with bands to control involuntary movements that might occur during the dental procedure. The dental treatment started 2 min after midazolam administration. Once the patients were sufficiently sedated, local anesthesia with 2% lidocaine with 1/100,000 adrenaline was delivered before the clinical procedures. The maximum dose of local anesthetic was limited strictly to 4.4 mg/kg for all patients. Resuscitation equipment was available if required and a medical team followed each treatment session.

The efficacy of sedation and the duration of the dental treatment were investigated. The efficacy of sedation was evaluated by judgment of the patient cooperation to the dental treatment and the determination of the dose to be administered to each patient was accomplished by the cardiologist responsible for the sedation at CAOE/FOA/ UNESP, according to the patient′s body weight, physiological, nutritional and pathological evaluation. In the present study, the mean effective dosage was 0.61 mg/kg. According to the observations made by the senior researcher, the sedation was considered to be effective when the patient was classified as "Cooperative" (the patient was sedated and remained awake, sleeping or sleepy during the treatment session, but was cooperative). The sedation was considered not-effective when the patient was classified as "Non-cooperative" (the patient was awake and uncooperative, not allowing the procedures to be done, even after sedation. The adverse effects of CIV were also evaluated in each subject. The incidence of pre- and post-CIV complications, including vomiting, respiratory depression and others (tremor, tachycardia), were also evaluated.

Data were analyzed statistically by the chi-square test. Statistical differences were considered significant at p<0.05.

Results

A total of 626 dental procedures, such as amalgam, resin and glass ionomer cement restorations, sealants, extractions, scaling and root planing, root canal therapy, and others (frenectomy, ulectomy and biopsy), were performed (3.8 procedures per patient on the average) [Figure - 2].

The mean treatment duration was 33.9 min [Table - 1]. In 56% of the patients, all necessary procedures were completed in a single session.

CIV was effective for dental treatment in 80% of the subjects with ID. There was accentuated resistance in 20% of the patients during the dental procedures, and these patients were subjected to GA in another day. There was no statistically significant association (p>0.05) between midazolam dose (mg/Kg) and patient response [Table - 2].

There was statistically significant difference (p<0.05) between the absence and the presence of adverse reactions in this study. There were 49 episodes of adverse reactions in 35 patients (only 21.47%), in which 16.5% were related to respiratory depression, 6.7% to vomiting, 4% to flutter and 2.4% to other reactions [Table - 3].

In these cases, patients received appropriate medical assistance and medication. There was no difference regarding to the dosage per body weight of medication administered to the patients who developed adverse reactions [Table - 2].

Discussion

Over the last few years several management modalities have been developed to overcome difficulties encountered during complex dental procedures for treatment of special needs patients. Various methods of sedation and sedatives have been described for dental treatment for patients with ID as preferred alternative to full GA [6],[9],[10] .

It is widely accepted that CIV is safer than GA [11],[12],[13] . However, poorly controlled conscious sedation may result in "deep sedation" or even GA with all its attendant risks [13] . Since the possibility of an exaggerated level of central nervous system depression always exists, the drugs and techniques employed must carry a wide margin of safety, and the physician should be particularly careful to render the loss of reflexes unlikely. This is especially true in some of the disable patients who are chronically medicated, which could alter their response to certain sedative drugs [12] . However, it is necessary to emphasize that the highest interaction chances are reported, mainly through the use of oral midazolam, with the following drugs: carbamazepine, phenytoin, rifampicin, roxithromycin, erythromycin, fluconazole and verapamil [7] . It is important that during intravenous sedation vital signs including blood pressure, pulse rate, and arterial blood oxygen saturation are continuously and properly monitored and recorded [15] .

Currently, there is divergence among the dose, drugs and administration route used in CIV. The present study describes the use of CIV as an alternative to GA in dental treatment of patients with ID at CAOE/FOA/UNESP, Brazil. A bolus administration of midazolam was performed, which has been reported to be useful in dental treatment [16],[17],[18] .

The subjects in this study had previously exhibited behavior sufficiently negative to dental treatment using routine behavior management techniques. However, the intravenous technique resulted in a sedative effect. Carrying out dental care by this method, the patient′s rejection and evasive behavior patterns were reduced as compared with the controls (previous treatment without intravenous sedation). The rate of behavior evaluated as positive were 80% of cases, although the other 20% that exhibited negative behavior were subjected to GA in another day. It was found that intravenous midazolam is a very effective form of sedation for patients with ID.

The dose used in intravenous sedation in this study for each patient was obtained by analysis of weight, pathology, behavior and physiology. In this analysis a medium dose was 0.61 mg/kg. The doses used were higher than that used in other studies with patients without ID [17],[18] . In accordance with this result, others studies have also demonstrate that dental patients with ID need higher doses of sedative to obtain an adequate level of sedation [9],[19] .

The reason that dental patients with ID required a higher dose of midazolam than other patients is unclear. Variations among individuals are thought to result from pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors [9] . In this study, the blood concentration of midazolam was not measured, but it is possible that in subjects with ID it does not increase proportionally to the administrated dose [17] .

In this way, pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic factors are thought to be involved in the variations of the required dose of sedative for intravenous sedation. The differences in the required doses of midazolam between subjects with ID and other subjects might derive from differences in sensitivity to the sedative because the success will be dependent on the individual response of each patient [9] .

Adverse events are rare in dental anesthesia, and a definitive evaluation of safety requires a long history of treatment using a given technique. While a trial of this size cannot assess the frequency of possible adverse events, the present results indicate a safe technique. The conscious sedation techniques practiced in the present ensured cooperation and consciousness throughout the procedure and full control of protective reflexes. This procedure presents minimal risk in contrast to GA [11] .

The subjects of this study were able to receive the expected dental care, but complications like vomiting, respiratory depression, flutter, tremor and tachycardia could be noted. Despite these reactions, there were not significant differences for the presence of adverse reaction associated to drug dose (mg/kg).

It was defined as a true decrease of oxygen saturation when a pulse oxymeter reading of SpO2 below 92 percent. It was found 27 episodes of true decrease of oxygen saturation in this study. In accordance with others studies, the respiratory depression was the most predominant adverse reaction occurred during conscious sedation [15],[20],[21],[22],[23],[24] . The literature shows that children, elderly, obese, and patients with cerebral palsy, autism or medically compromised who were treated with conscious sedation were more susceptible to respiratory problems [15],[25],[26] . Supplemental oxygen has been recommended for all patients undergoing CIV [27] and in the present study supplementation was used in some cases, which presented respiratory depression. The reported incidence of nausea and vomiting after sedation and local anesthesia is less than that observed after GA (7% versus 14%). Moreover, the time to discharge was shorter for patients receiving sedation [28] . This study observed a very low complication rate with the use of oral midazolam in dental treatment for patients with ID.

In conclusion, the results of this study showed that CIV is a useful method for providing dental care to patients with ID and produced fewer adverse reactions in comparison to GA. The dose used indicated that dental patients with ID need higher doses of sedative to obtain adequate levels of sedation. In spite of being considered an important matter, there is insufficient evidence of the health care for subjects with ID, and further studies are necessary for offering better dental care to these patients.

References

1.Waldman HB, Perlman SP, Swerdloff M. What if dentists did no treat peolpe with disabilities? ASDC J Dent Child. 1998; 65: 96-101.  Back to cited text no. 1    
2.Glassman P, Miller C, Wozniak T, Jones C. A preventive dentistry trainning program for caretakers of persons with disabilities residing in community residential facilities. Spec Care Dent. 1994; 14: 137-43.  Back to cited text no. 2    
3.Nunn JH, Murray JJ. The dental health of handicapped children in Newcastle and Northumberland. Br Dent J. 1987; 162: 9-14.  Back to cited text no. 3    
4.Leviton FJ. The willingness of dentists to treat handicapped patients: a summary of eleven surveys. J Dent Handicap. 1980; 5: 13-7.  Back to cited text no. 4    
5.Ferguson FS, Berentsen B, Richardson PS.Dentists' willingness to provide care for patients with developmental disabilities. Spec Care Dentist. 1991; 11: 234-7.  Back to cited text no. 5    
6.Manley MC, Skelly AM, Hamilton AG. Dental treatment for people with challenging behaviour: general anaesthesia or sedation? Br Dent J. 2000; 188: 358-60.  Back to cited text no. 6    
7.Ramos TC, Ramos MESP, Azoubel MCF, Soares AR, Alves ETP, Bezerra F. Midazolam: aspectos clinicos e farmacol6gicos em sedagao consciente. Estudo retrospectivo avaliando 258 casos clinicos. Innov Implant J. 2009; 4(1): 39-45.  Back to cited text no. 7    
8.Perez Y, Pardo A, Sequera R, Crespo JD. Sedaci6n y analgesia en pacientes pediatricos para procedimientos fuera Del area quirrirgica. Rev Venez Anestesiol. 2001; 6: 86-100.  Back to cited text no. 8    
9.Miyawaki T, Kohjitani A, Maeda S, Egusa M, Mori T, Higuchi H et al. Intravenous sedation for dental patients with intellectual disability. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2004; 48: 764-8.  Back to cited text no. 9    
10.Fukuta O, Braham RL, Yanase H, Kurosu K. The sedative effects of intranasal midazolam administration in the dental treatment of patients with mental disabilities. Part 2: optimal concentration of intranasal midazolam. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 1994; 18: 259-65.  Back to cited text no. 10    
11.Averley PA, Girdler NM, Bond S, Steen N, Steele J. A randomised controlled trial of paediatric conscious sedation for dental treatment using intravenous midazolam combined with inhaled nitrous oxide or nitrous oxide/ sevoflurane. Anaesthesia. 2004; 59: 844-52.  Back to cited text no. 11    
12.Malamed SF. Sedation. A guide to patient management, 3rd edn. Boston: Mosby; 1995.  Back to cited text no. 12    
13.Chaushu S, Gozal D, Becker A. Intravenous sedation: an adjunct to enable orthodontic treatment for children with disabilities. Eur J Orthod. 2002; 24: 81-9.  Back to cited text no. 13    
14.Morton NS, Oomen GJ. Development of a selection and monitoring protocol for safe sedation of children. Paediatr Anaesth. 1998; 8: 65-8  Back to cited text no. 14    
15.Cote CJ, Notterman DA, Karl HW, Weinberg JA, McCloskey C. Adverses sedation events in pediatrics: a critical incident analysis of contributing factors. Pediatrics. 2000; 105: 805-14.  Back to cited text no. 15    
16.Milnes AR, Maupome G, Cannon J. Intravenous sedation in pediatric dentistry using midazolam, nalbuphine and droperidol. Pediatr Dent. 2000; 22: 113-9.  Back to cited text no. 16    
17.Runes J, Strom C. Midazolam intravenous conscious sedation in oral surgery. A retrospective study of 372 cases. Swed Dent J. 1996; 20: 29-33.  Back to cited text no. 17    
18.Richards A, Griffiths M, Scully C. Wide variation in patient response to midazolam sedation for outpatient oral surgery.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral. Pathol. 1993; 76: 408-11.  Back to cited text no. 18    
19.Roelofse JA, van der Bijl P.Propofol for sedation in a mentally retarded dental patient. Anesth Prog. 1994; 41: 81-2.  Back to cited text no. 19    
20.Bailey PL, Pace NL, Ashburn MA, Moll JW, East KA, Stanley TH. Frequent hypoxemia and apnea after sedation with midazolam and fentanyl. Anesthesiology. 1990; 73: 826-30.  Back to cited text no. 20    
21.Kupietzky A, Houpt MI. Midazolam: a review of its use for conscious sedation of children. Pediatr Dent. 1993; 15: 237-41.  Back to cited text no. 21    
22.Litman RS, Berkowitz RJ, Ward DS. Levels of consciousness and ventilatory parameters in young children during sedation with oral midazolam and nitrous oxide. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1996; 150: 671-5.  Back to cited text no. 22    
23.Rohlfing GK, Dilley DC, Lucas WJ, Vann WF Jr. The effect of supplemental oxygen on apnea and oxygen saturation during pediatric conscious sedation. Pediatr Dent. 1998; 20: 8-16.  Back to cited text no. 23    
24.Blumer JL. Clinical pharmacology of midazolam in infants and children. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1998; 35: 37-47.  Back to cited text no. 24    
25.Hardeman JH, Sabol SR, Goldwasser MS. Incidence of hypoxemia in the postanesthetic recovery room in patients having undergone intravenous sedation for outpatient oral surgery. J. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990; 48: 942-4.  Back to cited text no. 25    
26.Zacharias M, Hunter KM, Parkinson R. Respiratory effects of intravenous midazolam. N Z Dent J.1996; 92: 76-9.  Back to cited text no. 26    
27.Manara AR, Smith DC, Nixon C. Sedation during spinal anaesthesia: a case for the routine administration of oxygen. Br J Anaesth. 1989; 63: 343-5.  Back to cited text no. 27    
28.Brandt SK, Bugg JL Jr. Problems of medication with the pediatric patient. Dent Clin North Am. 1984; 28: 563-7.  Back to cited text no. 28    

Copyright 2010 - Braz J Oral Sci


The following images related to this document are available:

Photo images

[os10002t3.jpg] [os10002t1.jpg] [os10002f2.jpg] [os10002t2.jpg] [os10002f1.jpg]
Home Faq Resources Email Bioline
© Bioline International, 1989 - 2024, Site last up-dated on 01-Sep-2022.
Site created and maintained by the Reference Center on Environmental Information, CRIA, Brazil
System hosted by the Google Cloud Platform, GCP, Brazil