Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

94 questions · 96 findings · 11 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 17 · 17.7%GRADE not reported 1 · 1%Very low 35 · 36.5%Low 24 · 25%Moderate 17 · 17.7%High 2 · 2.1%

Intravenous midazolam vs placebo

Discomfort/pain · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 167 participants
Very low

Intravenous midazolam vs placebo

Allergic or anaphylactoid reaction · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam

Anxiety · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

Intravenous midazolam showed no clear difference in numeric rating of anxiety or rated as anxious compared with diazepam (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.8 [0.39, 1.62]
2 studies · 175 participants
Low

Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam

Incomplete procedure · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 170 participants
GRADE not reported

Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam

Anterograde amnesia (defined by number of participants who recalled the procedure) · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

Intravenous midazolam may leads to lower anterograde amnesia (defined by number of participants who recalled… compared with diazepam (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.45 [0.3, 0.66]
9 studies · 587 participants
Low

Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam

Disinhibition or excitation · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam

Discomfort/pain · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

Intravenous midazolam showed no clear difference in discomfort/pain compared with diazepam (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.6 [0.24, 1.49]
5 studies · 415 participants
Low

Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam

Allergic or anaphylactoid reaction · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Intravenous midazolam vs placebo

Level of sedation on a sedation assessment scale · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 100 participants
Low

Intravenous midazolam vs placebo

Anxiety · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy

1 finding from 1 review

Midazolam for sedation before procedures 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 100 participants
Low

Intervention not reported

Anxiety (consumer influence on healthcare outcomes) · patients undergoing endoscopy or patients who receive PCA

1 finding from 1 review

Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient… 2006 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 335 participants
Moderate

Intervention not reported

Satisfaction with information material (consumers' satisfaction with products resulting from consumer involvement) · patients undergoing endoscopy or patients who receive PCA

1 finding from 1 review

Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient… 2006 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 335 participants
Moderate

Intervention not reported

Knowledge of patient‐controlled analgesia (consumer influence on healthcare outcomes) · patients undergoing endoscopy or patients who receive PCA

1 finding from 1 review

Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient… 2006 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 100 participants
Moderate

Erythromycin vs placebo

UGIH‐related mortality · people with acute UGIH

1 finding from 1 review

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 255 participants
Very low

Erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage vs no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage

All‐cause mortality · people with acute UGIH

It is very uncertain whether erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage changes all‐cause mortality compared with no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 238 participants
Very low

Erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage vs no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage

Visualisation of gastric mucosa · people with acute UGIH

1 finding from 1 review

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 170 participants
Very low

Erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage vs no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage

NSAEs · people with acute UGIH

It is very uncertain whether erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage changes NSAEs compared with no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RD 0
6 studies · 408 participants
Very low

Erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage vs no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage

Rebleeding · people with acute UGIH

It is very uncertain whether erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage changes rebleeding compared with no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.13 [0.63, 2.02]
1 study · 169 participants
Very low

Erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage vs no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage

Blood transfusion · people with acute UGIH

1 finding from 1 review

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 180 participants
Very low

Erythromycin vs nasogastric tube lavage

UGIH‐related mortality · people with acute UGIH

1 finding from 1 review

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 44 participants
Very low