• Annisa Siu, Nam-Anh Tran, Samina Ali, Doug Coyle, Quenby Mahood, Yanara Marks, Petros Pechlivanoglou, Naveen Poonai, and Anna Heath.
• Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario.
• Pediatr Emerg Care. 2024 Feb 1; 40 (2): 889788-97.

ObjectivesTo systematically appraise the literature on the relative effectiveness of pharmacologic procedural distress management agents for children undergoing laceration repair.MethodsSix databases were searched in August 2021, and the search was updated in January 2023. We included completed randomized or quasi-randomized trials involving ( a ) children younger than 15 years undergoing laceration repair in the emergency department; ( b ) randomization to at least one anxiolytic, sedative, and/or analgesic agent versus any comparator agent or placebo; ( c ) efficacy of procedural distress management measured on any scale. Secondary outcomes were pain during the procedure, administration acceptance, sedation duration, additional sedation, length of stay, and stakeholder satisfaction. Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool assessed individual studies. Ranges and proportions summarized results where applicable.ResultsAmong 21 trials (n = 1621 participants), the most commonly studied anxiolytic agents were midazolam, ketamine, and N 2 O. Oral midazolam, oral ketamine, and N 2 O were found to reduce procedural distress more effectively than their comparators in 4, 3, and 2 studies, respectively. Eight studies comparing routes, doses, or volumes of administration of the same agent led to indeterminate results. Meta-analysis was not performed because of heterogeneity in comparators, routes, and outcome measures across studies.ConclusionsBased on procedural distress reduction, this study favors oral midazolam and oral ketamine. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution because of heterogeneous comparators across studies and minor conflicting results. An optimal agent for procedural distress management cannot be recommended based on the limited evidence. Future research should seek to identify the minimal, essential measures of patient distress during pharmacologic anxiolysis and/or sedation in laceration repair to guide future trials and reviews.Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

18 keywords...

hide…