title: The effects of oral droperidol versus oral metoclopramide versus both oral droperidol and metoclopramide on postoperative vomiting when used as a premedicant for strabismus surgery.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the efficacy of oral droperidol versus oral metoclopramide, or both oral droperidol and metoclopramide, on postoperative vomiting when used as a premedicant for strabismus surgery.
  
  
  METHODS
  Double-blind, randomized, prospective study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Academic children's hospital.
  
  
  METHODS
  154 ASA physical status I and II ambulatory patients, ages 1 to 15 years, scheduled for strabismus surgery.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients were randomly assigned to receive colored sugar water containing either droperidol 300 mcg/kg orally, metoclopramide 0.15 mg/kg orally, both droperidol 300 mcg/kg and metoclopramide 0.15 mg/kg orally, or no active ingredient (placebo group) as a premedicant. The premedications were given orally 1 to 1.5 hours prior to the operation.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Patients were analyzed for the number of episodes of vomiting from the time of their emergence from anesthesia through the first 24 hours postoperatively, including the convalescent period at home. Patients were also analyzed for length of hospital stay. There were no statistically significant differences between groups regarding age, premedication time, surgery time, or discharge time. Droperidol and droperidol-metoclopramide were significantly more effective (p < 0.012) than either the metoclopramide group or the placebo group in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting following strabismus surgery.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our data suggest that oral droperidol 300 mcg/kg and the combination of oral droperidol 300 mcg/kg and metoclopramide 0.15 mg/kg are effective in reducing the frequency of vomiting within the first 24 hours after strabismus surgery. The combination of oral droperidol and oral metoclopramide is highly effective in reducing the frequency of vomiting postoperatively in strabismus ambulatory surgery patients (p = 0.017). This combination seems to represent an inexpensive alternative to the more costly ondansetron.
authors.affiliation: Division of Pediatric Anesthesia, Arkansas Children's Hospital, Little Rock 72202-3591, USA.
authors.forename: P J
authors.initials: PJ
authors.lastname: Kymer
authors.forename: R E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Brown
authors.forename: C D
authors.initials: CD
authors.lastname: Lawhorn
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Jones
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Pearce
mesh_terms: D000284:Administration, Oral; D000293:Adolescent; D000556:Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; D000762:Anesthesia Recovery Period; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D004329:Droperidol / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D004338:Drug Combinations; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D007902:Length of Stay; D008787:Metoclopramide / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D009325:Nausea / Q000517:prevention & control; D010919:Placebos; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011292:Premedication; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013285:Strabismus / Q000601:surgery*; D014839:Vomiting / Q000517:prevention & control*
chemical_list: D004338:Drug Combinations; D010919:Placebos; D008787:Metoclopramide; D004329:Droperidol