Comparison Between Oral and Enema of Chloral Hydrate
Effects Comparison Between Oral and Enema of Chloral Hydrate in Pediatric Ophthalmic Examination
1 other identifier
interventional
120
0 countries
N/A
Brief Summary
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).
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Jan 2017
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
January 1, 2017
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
July 1, 2017
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
July 1, 2017
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
July 30, 2017
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
August 8, 2017
CompletedAugust 8, 2017
August 1, 2017
6 months
July 30, 2017
August 3, 2017
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Demography (age, sex, weight, laterality and medical history)
The demography of cataract and healthy children were recorded by using a semi-structured questionnaire
baseline
Secondary Outcomes (4)
Side effect
the following 48 hour after using the drug
the time of Sleepiness:Onset time (min)
baseline
the time of Sleepiness:Duration of examination (min)
baseline
the time of Sleepiness:Recovery time (min)
baseline
Study Arms (2)
oral group
ACTIVE COMPARATORenema group
EXPERIMENTALInterventions
Chloral hydrate syrup was available in a concentration of 100 mg×ml-1.The children assigned to receive 0.8 ml×kg-1 of chloral hydrate (80 mg×kg-1) by oral.
Chloral hydrate syrup was available in a concentration of 100 mg×ml-1 at our hospital.The children assigned to receive 0.8 ml×kg-1 of chloral hydrate (80 mg×kg-1) by enema.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- diagnosed with congenital cataract aged from 3 to 36 months weight from 5 to 15 kg with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status 1-2
You may not qualify if:
- with gastro-esophageal reflux, nausea and vomiting, apnea in the past 3 months recent pneumonia exacerbation of asthma, bronchitis and upper respiratory tract infection bradycardia, and facial abnormalities, allergy to chloral hydrate, weight \<2 or \>20 kg .
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
MeSH Terms
Interventions
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Haotian Lin, M.D,Ph.D
Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- OTHER
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Clinical Professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
July 30, 2017
First Posted
August 8, 2017
Study Start
January 1, 2017
Primary Completion
July 1, 2017
Study Completion
July 1, 2017
Last Updated
August 8, 2017
Record last verified: 2017-08