The effect of playing music and mother's voice to children on sedation level and requirement during pediatric magnetic resonance imaging.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging examinations frequently cause anxiety and fear in children. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of listening to music sound, the mother's voice, and sound isolation on the depth of sedation and need for sedatives in pediatric patients who would undergo MRI. METHODS: Ninety pediatric patients aged 3 to 12 years who were planned for imaging in the MRI unit were randomly assigned to isolation group (Group I), musical sound group (Group II), and mother's voice group (Group III). We evaluated patients' anxiety and sedation levels via the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) RESULTS: Heart rate, oxygen saturation, OAA/S, and Ramsey scores during the procedure were not significantly different among the groups (p>0.05). The mean amount of propofol and total propofol consumption was statistically lower in the mother's voice group than in the isolation and music sound groups (p<0.001). Mean propofol amount and total propofol consumption were not significantly different in isolation and music sound groups (p>0.05). No difference was found between the groups regarding the time it took for the patients' Modified Aldrete score to reach 9 (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In pediatric patients, listening to the mother's voice during MRI decreased the total sedative requirement consumed without increasing the depth of sedation.

Comparison of 0.5% levobupivacaine, 0.5% bupivacaine, and 2% lidocaine for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery.

PURPOSE: The authors compared the efficacy of local anesthetics levobupivacaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery. METHODS: A total of 135 patients presenting for vitreoretinal surgery under local anesthesia were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups. Group LB patients received 5 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine, Group L patients received 5 mL of 2% lidocaine, and Group B patients received 5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine for retrobulbar anesthesia via inferotemporal injection. Sensory and motor block durations were recorded. Intraoperative and postoperative pain was assessed by using verbal pain scala. Anesthesia efficiency, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and akinesia were assessed by using point scales. Hemodynamic data and adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: The demographic characteristics of patients, duration of surgery, and hemodynamic data in both groups were similar. The duration of motor and sensory block was longer in levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups than lidocaine group. Pain on injection was found more frequent in Group L and Group B than Group LB and the difference between the Groups LB and B was significant (p<0.05). Surgeon and patient satisfaction were also higher and intraoperative pain was less in levobupivacaine group than lidocaine and bupivacaine groups. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine provides longer motor and sensory block duration and higher surgeon and patient satisfaction than lidocaine and bupivacaine when used for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery.