Download PDF
Am J Perinatol 2022; 39(S 01): S73-S76
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1758532
Short Communication

Intranasal Midazolam Premedication for Digital Image-Assisted Fundus Examination in Preterm Neonates

Victor Sartorius 
1   Division of Pediatrics and Neonatal Critical Care, “Antoine Béclère” Medical Centre, Paris Saclay University Hospitals, APHP, Clamart, France
,
Mélanie Tellier
1   Division of Pediatrics and Neonatal Critical Care, “Antoine Béclère” Medical Centre, Paris Saclay University Hospitals, APHP, Clamart, France
,
Isabelle Jouvette
1   Division of Pediatrics and Neonatal Critical Care, “Antoine Béclère” Medical Centre, Paris Saclay University Hospitals, APHP, Clamart, France
,
Daniele De Luca 
1   Division of Pediatrics and Neonatal Critical Care, “Antoine Béclère” Medical Centre, Paris Saclay University Hospitals, APHP, Clamart, France
2   Physiopathology and Therapeutic Innovation Unit-INSERM U999, Paris Saclay University, Le Plessis-Robinson, France
› Author Affiliations Funding None declared.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and tolerability of fundus examination in preterm newborns after implementing a premedication with intranasal midazolam as a quality improvement project in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

Study Design Prospective examination of all fundus examinations between January and June 2022, before 0 (T0) and after 1 (T1), 15 (T15), and 60 (T60) minutes from intranasal midazolam administration. The EDIN (Echelle de Douleur et Incomfort du Nouveau-né [newborn pain and discomfort score—in French]) pain score was calculated and various physiologic parameters were recorded. Data were analyzed with repeated measures ANOVA (analysis of variance).

Results A total of 36 fundus examinations were performed in 27 noninvasively ventilated patients. The mean EDIN score went from 0.8 ± 1 at T0 to 0.72 ± 1.05 at T1, then to 0.22 ± 0.59 at T15, and to 0 ± 0 at T60 (p < 0.001). Thus, it remained below the threshold of 5, which is associated with significant pain. The mean heart rate decreased from 164 ± 16 at T0, to 161 ± 16 at T1, then to 154 ± 14 at T15, and to 153 ± 12 at T60 (p < 0.001). There was no significant change in the oxygen saturation/inspired oxygen fraction ratio across the four time points (p = 0.202) and the mean arterial pressure was similar before and after the administration of midazolam (60 ± 10 vs. 59 ± 10, p = 0.571).

Conclusion Intranasal midazolam provides good comfort and normal physiological parameters; therefore, the implementation of a NICU protocol to improve quality of retinal examinations seems feasible and well tolerated.

Key Points

  • Fundus examinations did not cause pain after premedication with intranasal midazolam.

  • No respiratory or circulatory adverse effect was reported.

  • Implementing such a premedication protocol in the NICU seems feasible, helpful, and well tolerated.

Keywords

fundus - retinopathy of prematurity - pain - midazolam


Publication History

Received: 30 July 2022

Accepted: 21 September 2022

Article published online:
15 November 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Shalev B, Farr AK, Repka MX. Randomized comparison of diode laser photocoagulation versus cryotherapy for threshold retinopathy of prematurity: seven-year outcome. Am J Ophthalmol 2001; 132 (01) 76-80
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Huang Q, Zhang Q, Fei P. et al. Ranibizumab injection as primary treatment in patients with retinopathy of prematurity: anatomic outcomes and influencing factors. Ophthalmology 2017; 124 (08) 1156-1164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Fierson WM. American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Ophthalmology, ; American Academy of Ophthalmology, ; American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, ; American Association of Certified Orthoptists. Screening examination of premature infants for retinopathy of prematurity. Pediatrics 2018; 142 (06) e20183061
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Carbajal R, Rousset A, Danan C. et al. Epidemiology and treatment of painful procedures in neonates in intensive care units. JAMA 2008; 300 (01) 60-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Belda S, Pallás CR, De la Cruz J, Tejada P. Screening for retinopathy of prematurity: is it painful?. Biol Neonate 2004; 86 (03) 195-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Valeri BO, Holsti L, Linhares MBM. Neonatal pain and developmental outcomes in children born preterm: a systematic review. Clin J Pain 2015; 31 (04) 355-362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Debillon T, Zupan V, Ravault N, Magny JF, Dehan M. Development and initial validation of the EDIN scale, a new tool for assessing prolonged pain in preterm infants. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2001; 85 (01) F36-F41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cohen AM, Cook N, Harris MC, Ying GS, Binenbaum G. The pain response to mydriatic eyedrops in preterm infants. J Perinatol 2013; 33 (06) 462-465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Milési C, Baleine J, Mura T. et al. Nasal midazolam vs ketamine for neonatal intubation in the delivery room: a randomised trial. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2018; 103 (03) F221-F226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Disher T, Cameron C, Mitra S, Cathcart K, Campbell-Yeo M. Pain-relieving interventions for retinopathy of prematurity: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 2018; 142 (01) e20180401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 van Dijk M, Peters JWB, van Deventer P, Tibboel D. The COMFORT Behavior Scale: a tool for assessing pain and sedation in infants. Am J Nurs 2005; 105 (01) 33-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar