Safety and Adverse Event Profile of Procedural Sedation for Pediatric Burn Wound Care: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

Clicks: 27
ID: 328718
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #19 of 86 articles by views in journal of burn care & research : official publication of the american burn association

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Procedural sedation is essential for pediatric burn care, yet standardized, evidence-based regimens are lacking. This study characterizes the safety profile and pharmacological predictors of adverse events (AEs) in intensivist-led pediatric burn sedations. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 626 procedural sedations across 208 pediatric burn patients at a single tertiary pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) from 2016 to 2025. Sedations were evaluated for medication exposure, burn severity, and clinical outcomes. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) logistic regression model, adjusting for patient demographics, burn severity, and repeated encounters, was utilized to identify independent predictors of AEs. The median patient age was 3 years, with a median total body surface area burned of 5%. The overall AE rate was 13.1%, predominantly consisting of transient respiratory events, including oxygen desaturation (9.1%) and airway obstruction (8.1%). There were zero serious AEs, such as unplanned intubations or death. Multi-drug regimens were utilized in 79.9% of encounters. In multivariable analysis, both propofol use (OR 5.10, 95% CI 2.22-11.75, p<0.001) and ketamine use (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.19-5.89, p=0.018) were independent predictors of AEs, even after adjusting for baseline case complexity and burn severity. Pediatric critical care physician-led procedural sedation for pediatric burn wound care is safe, with zero serious adverse events observed over a 9-year period. While propofol and ketamine are both independently associated with transient respiratory events, propofol exhibits a strict dose-dependent risk whereas ketamine's risk is dose-independent. Both require vigilance, but these predictable risk profiles allow for highly individualized, bedside risk-stratification.
Reference Key
openalex_W7213319929 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors John Tumberger, Hammad Ganatra, Anna Burns, David Lauterwasser, Julia Slater, Francesca Pérez Marquès, Travis Langner, Shawn Sood
Journal journal of burn care & research : official publication of the american burn association
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jbcr/irag165
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irag165
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.