Assessment of Disparities in the Use of Anxiolysis and Sedation Among Children Undergoing Laceration Repair

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine if race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) were associated with the provision of anxiolysis and/or sedation among children undergoing laceration repair.MethodsA 1-year cross-sectional sample of children undergoing laceration repair in an urban tertiary-care pediatric emergency department was analyzed. Primary outcomes included the use of nonpharmacologic anxiolysis (presence of a child life specialist), pharmacologic anxiolysis, and procedural sedation. Predictors included race/ethnicity (Caucasian vs minority) and SES (represented by insurance status: private vs none/public). Bivariable analyses provided unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the association between predictors and outcomes, and logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted ORs for the provision of anxiolysis and sedation (adjusted for age, gender, acuity, provider type, length of laceration, complexity of repair, time of day, use of a topical anesthetic, and body site of laceration).ResultsIn the unadjusted analysis, a higher proportion of Caucasian children than minority children received nonpharmacologic anxiolysis and sedation, and a higher proportion of children with high SES received nonpharmacologic anxiolysis compared with children of low SES. However, these associations were not statistically significant once potential confounders were controlled in the adjusted analysis.ConclusionsA very small proportion of children undergoing laceration repair at this single institution received pharmacologic anxiolysis and/or procedural sedation. We did not demonstrate racial/ethnic or socioeconomic disparities with respect to the management of procedure-related anxiety in children.