Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
To compare the clinical sedative effect and safety using 10% chloral hydrate during ophthalmic examinations for oral vs enema group.The patients were randomly divided into two groups (oral group and enema group) using a computer random number generator with a 1:1 allocation (simple randomization, odd number for oral group and even number for enema group).
Full description
To compare the clinical sedative effect and safety using 10% chloral hydrate during ophthalmic examinations for oral vs enema group.The patients were randomly divided into two groups (oral group and enema group) using a computer random number generator with a 1:1 allocation (simple randomization, odd number for oral group and even number for enema group).One hundred and twenty children aged from 3 to 36 months (5-15 kg) scheduled to ophthalmic examinations were randomly sedated by oral chloral hydrate(80 mg×kg-1, n = 60) or enema chloral hydrate(80 mg×kg-1, n = 60). The primary endpoint was successful sedation to complete the examinations including slit-lamp photography, tonometry, anterior segment analysis, and refractive error inspection. The secondary endpoints included onset time, duration of examination, recovery time, discharge time, any side effects during examination, and within 48 h after discharge.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
120 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal