We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Lumbar puncture in pediatric oncology: conscious sedation vs. general anesthesia.
Medical and Pediatric Oncology 2001 March
BACKGROUND: Lumbar punctures (LP) generally have been performed with conscious sedation (CS) but are increasingly performed using general anesthesia (GA) owing to the belief that this is less distressing. The aim of this study was to compare these two methods concerning distress, discomfort, pain, well-being and security after the LP, and problems with the LP.
PROCEDURE: Twenty-five children with cancer participated in this prospective, randomized, crossover study. Children, parents, and nurses completed a visual analogue scale questionnaire to evaluate the efficacy of CS and GA. In addition, sedation and anesthesia protocols were reviewed.
RESULTS: The two methods seemed to be equivalent concerning distress, discomfort, pain, well-being and security after the procedure, and procedure problems. Most children (80%), parents (66%), and nurses (58%) preferred LP in CS. However, the LP was not performed in CS in five cases because the child did not cooperate. Younger children less often preferred CS.
CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for CS and GA in LP were similar. Although there were failures with the CS model, most preferred it to GA. LP in CS also saved time and medical resources. An alternative approach would be to have a pediatric anesthesiologist available at the oncology ward for these elective LPs to provide the sedation or anesthesia required by each individual.
PROCEDURE: Twenty-five children with cancer participated in this prospective, randomized, crossover study. Children, parents, and nurses completed a visual analogue scale questionnaire to evaluate the efficacy of CS and GA. In addition, sedation and anesthesia protocols were reviewed.
RESULTS: The two methods seemed to be equivalent concerning distress, discomfort, pain, well-being and security after the procedure, and procedure problems. Most children (80%), parents (66%), and nurses (58%) preferred LP in CS. However, the LP was not performed in CS in five cases because the child did not cooperate. Younger children less often preferred CS.
CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for CS and GA in LP were similar. Although there were failures with the CS model, most preferred it to GA. LP in CS also saved time and medical resources. An alternative approach would be to have a pediatric anesthesiologist available at the oncology ward for these elective LPs to provide the sedation or anesthesia required by each individual.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app