Sedation and Analgesia in ICU Paediatric Patients
Total comfort for the child is a goal that should be part of every admission to the paediatric intensive care unit. It is no longer acceptable to focus our attention only on the acute aspects of the disease process which has resulted in the PICU admission while ignoring all others. In the past comfort issues have rarely been addressed unless they directly impacted on management, but now the interrelationship between comfort and outcome have begun to surface. Total comfort for the child must be approached differently than the adult because of differences which exist in pharmacology of the medications used, neurological maturation, and cognitive development which occur as the paediatric patient matures. Total comfort is directed towards pain management. The pain which needs to be addressed is the physical pain resulting from trauma, surgery or the disease process as well as the psychological pain which results from the strange environment and the need to lay still in bed while the physical problems are being dealt with.
KeywordsEpidural Space Retrograde Amnesia Sedative Agent Sedative Medication Paradoxical Reaction
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 5.Beyer JE, Wells N (1989) The assessment of pain in children. Pediatr Clin N Am 36: 837–853Google Scholar
- 7.Barrier G, Attia J, Mayer MN et al (1989) Measurement of postoperative pain and narcotic administration in infants using a new clinical scoring system. Intens Care Med 15: S37–S39Google Scholar
- 8.Rosen DA, Rosen KR, Bhatt-Mehta V (1991) Clinical approaches to sedation in the pediatric intensive care unit. In: Reves JG (ed) Anesthesia and sedation by continuous infusion. Excerpta Medica, Elsevier, Princeton NJ 89–96Google Scholar
- 14.Khan LC, Lustik SJ (1997) Treatment of a paradoxical reaction to midazolam with haloperidol. Anesth Anal 85: 213–215Google Scholar
- 15.Kissin I, Lee SS, Arthur G et al (1997) Effects of midazolam on development of acute tolerance to alfentanil: the role of pharmacokinetic interaction. Anesth Anal 85: 182–187Google Scholar