Pediatric Emergency Care

Home Current Issue Previous Issues Published Ahead-of-Print For Authors Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > August 2008 - Volume 24 - Issue 8 > Dosing Ketamine for Pediatric Procedural Sedation in the Eme...
Pediatric Emergency Care:
August 2008 - Volume 24 - Issue 8 - pp 529-533
doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e318180fdb5
Original Articles

Dosing Ketamine for Pediatric Procedural Sedation in the Emergency Department

Dallimore, Daniel MBChB; Herd, David W. MBChB, FRACP; Short, Tim MD, FANZCA; Anderson, Brian J. PhD, FANZCA

Collapse Box

Abstract

Objective: To describe intravenous ketamine dosing regimens for children requiring brief procedural sedation.

Methods: Time-concentration and sedation profiles were simulated in children (2, 6, and 12 years old) using published pediatric pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameter estimates. Single-dose, repeat-dosing, and infusion regimens to achieve sedation level of less than 2 (arouses slowly to consciousness, with sustained painful stimulus) for 15 minutes were investigated.

Results: A single bolus dose of 1.5 and 1.75, 2, and 2.125 mg/kg (for adult and 12-, 6-, and 2-year-olds, respectively) was required to achieve the desired sedation. Anticipated recovery would be slow, and a sedation level of 4 (drowsy, eyes open or closed but easily arouses to consciousness with verbal stimulus) was reached only after 70 minutes. The use of a smaller initial bolus with a subsequent half-dose "top-up" at 8 minutes achieves the same sedation level but with earlier recovery. A smaller initial dose of 0.25 and 0.275, 0.3, and 0.35 mg/kg followed by an infusion 2.5 and 2.75, 3, and 3.5 mg/kg per hour (for adult and 12-, 6-, and 2-year-olds, respectively) for 15 minutes gives a more even sedation level and rapid recovery (20 minutes to sedation level 4).

Conclusions: Dosing increases with decreasing age. A large single dose is associated with deep sedation, possible adverse effects, and delayed recovery. Between-subjects variability is large, and dose should be tailored to clinical monitoring and requirement. Intermittent pain insult is better suited to a top-up technique, whereas continuous pain is better suited to an infusion technique.

© 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

You currently do not have access to this article.

You may need to:

Note: If your society membership provides for full-access to this article, you may need to login on your society’s web site first.

Article Tools

You currently do not have access to this article.

You may need to:

Note: If your society membership provides for full-access to this article, you may need to login on your society’s web site first.

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.