Clinical trial NCT03054844: PREMIX vs PREMED Intranasal Lidocaine and Midazolam
Official title: Comparison of Two Methods Using Intranasal Lidocaine to Alleviate Discomfort Associated With Administration of Intranasal Midazolam in Children.
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: PHASE2
Conditions: Pain
Keywords: Intranasal
Pain
Lidocaine
Midazolam
Emergency department
Lead sponsor: Columbia University
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2017-02-16
Enrollment: 55
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 6
Maximum age (years): 7
Standard ages: CHILD
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: Intranasal (IN) midazolam is an anxiolytic that is commonly used in the pediatric population for procedural anxiolysis in the emergency department (ED) setting to facilitate painful and distressing procedures, such as laceration repairs. Intranasal midazolam is both effective and safe in children. However, due to the acidic nature of midazolam, there is a burning sensation that is associated with the intranasal administration of midazolam. The use of IN lidocaine has been shown to decrease the pain associated with the administration of IN midazolam and other acidic solutions. The IN lidocaine can be given as a premedication (PREMED), where it is sprayed in the nares first to provide topical anesthesia, and then followed by the administration of the IN midazolam. Lidocaine can also be given concurrently with the IN midazolam (PREMIX), where it is mixed with the midazolam and then the combined mixture administered. Both methods have been shown to be effective in decreasing the pain associated with the intranasal administration of acidic solutions, such as midazolam, although the PREMIX method could have the advantage of requiring less number of sprays, and be tolerated better by children. Although both methods have been shown to work, it is not known if the PREMIX method is non-inferior to the PREMED method for decreasing pain and distress associated with administering IN midazolam. Therefore, the investigators aim to determine if the PREMIX method is non-inferior to the PREMED method of using lidocaine to decrease the pain and distress associated with the administration of IN midazolam in children.

Detailed description: We will enroll 50 children to determine whether the PREMED method is non-inferior to the PREMIX method. We based our sample size on the outcome of pain and distress associated with the administration of IN midazolam, which will be measured using our primary outcome measure of the Observational Scale of Behavioral Distress-Revised (OSBD-R). The OSBD-R is an observational measure of distress that has been well validated in the pediatric population for evaluating painful and distressing procedures, and has been used in children as young as 1 year of age \[1,2\]. The sample size of 50 patients was determined based on a prestated margin of non-inferiority (delta) of 1.8 (SD 2.25). This value was based on the minimum clinically significant differences used in prior studies of painful procedures in children in the emergency department \[3,4,5\]. To determine noninferiority using a delta of 1.80 (SD 2.25), with a 1-tailed alpha of 0.025 and power of 80%, we would require 25 patients in each arm, for a total of 50 patients. OSBD-R scores will be determined independently by two blinded trained assessors who will review the videotapes of the study procedures. Interrater reliability of the OSBD-R between the two assessors will evaluated by determining the intraclass correlation coefficient. The period of administration of the midazolam alone in the PREMED group and the period of administration of the midazolam/lidocaine mixture in the PREMIX group are the two phases which will be compared to each other to determine our primary outcome.

Secondary outcome measures of pain and distress associated with IN midazolam administration will include the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS); the Faces-LegsActivity-Crying-Consolability (FLACC) scale; and cry duration. These are all continuous measures that will be analyzed using the independent samples t-test.We will also evaluate parental and provider satisfaction across various domains using a 5-point Likert scale (see attached document for questions to be asked). Responses will be dichotomized into "agree" (i.e. if respondent answers "agree" or "strongly agree") or "disagree" (i.e. if respondent responds "undecided", "disagree", or "strongly disagree") and analyzed using the chi square test.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

1. Between the age of ≥ 6 months or ≤ 7 years old
2. Undergoing a laceration repair
3. Treating physician has determined that patient requires intranasal midazolam to facilitate the laceration repair

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Weight \< 5 kg
2. Known allergy to Lidocaine or Midazolam
3. Does not speak English or Spanish
4. Nasal injury precluding IN medication delivery
5. Presence of intranasal obstruction (mucous/blood) not easily cleared with suction or nose blowing
6. Baseline motor neurological abnormality (e.g. motor deficit, cerebral palsy)
7. Developmental delay, autism, autism spectrum disorder

Primary outcomes:
measure: Procedural Distress, OSBD-R
timeFrame: 10 minutes
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Procedural Pain
timeFrame: 10 minutes
measure: Procedural Distress, FLACC
timeFrame: 10 minutes
measure: Procedural Distress, Cry Duration
timeFrame: 10 minutes
measure: Parental Satisfaction
timeFrame: 1 minute
measure: Provider Satisfaction
timeFrame: 1 minute
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: New York
country: United States
facility: Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital
state: New York
Study officials:
affiliation: Columbia University
name: Daniel S Tsze, MD, MPH
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: Tsze DS, Steele DW, Machan JT, Akhlaghi F, Linakis JG. Intranasal ketamine for procedural sedation in pediatric laceration repair: a preliminary report. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2012 Aug;28(8):767-70. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3182624935.
citation: Tsze DS, Ieni M, Fenster DB, Babineau J, Kriger J, Levin B, Dayan PS. Optimal Volume of Administration of Intranasal Midazolam in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2017 May;69(5):600-609. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.08.450. Epub 2016 Nov 4.
citation: Fenster DB, Dayan PS, Babineau J, Aponte-Patel L, Tsze DS. Randomized Trial of Intranasal Fentanyl Versus Intravenous Morphine for Abscess Incision and Drainage. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2018 Sep;34(9):607-612. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000000810.
citation: Godambe SA, Elliot V, Matheny D, Pershad J. Comparison of propofol/fentanyl versus ketamine/midazolam for brief orthopedic procedural sedation in a pediatric emergency department. Pediatrics. 2003 Jul;112(1 Pt 1):116-23. doi: 10.1542/peds.112.1.116.
citation: Lee-Jayaram JJ, Green A, Siembieda J, Gracely EJ, Mull CC, Quintana E, Adirim T. Ketamine/midazolam versus etomidate/fentanyl: procedural sedation for pediatric orthopedic reductions. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2010 Jun;26(6):408-12. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3181e057cd.