***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Nausea and vomiting are frequent adverse effects of patient-controlled analgesia with opioids . This study was design ed to compare the effect of midazolam to that of ondansetron for prevention of nausea and vomiting during morphine patient-controlled analgesia . In a r and omised , double-blind , prospect i ve trial , 90 patients were allocated to one of three groups of 30 each , to receive one of three patient-controlled analgesia regimens to manage postoperative pain : a combination of midazolam and morphine ( group M ) , a mixture of ondansetron and morphine ( group O ) or morphine alone ( group C ) . Patients were assessed for the incidence of nausea and vomiting , the degree of sedation ( awake , mild , moderate , deep ) and other side-effects during the first 24 hours after the operation . The frequency of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in groups M ( 27 % ) and O ( 37 % ) compared with group C ( 70 % ) ( P < 0.05 ) . The incidence of mild sedation in group M was significantly higher than that in groups O or C ( P < 0.05 ) . We conclude that midazolam is as effective as ondansetron in preventing opioid-induced nausea and vomiting following total abdominal hysterectomy and has acceptable side-effects Cardiac surgery has been associated with a significant incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) . To assess the antiemetic property of midazolam , we undertook this double-blinded , r and omized trial in 200 patients undergoing cardiac surgery involving cardiopulmonary bypass , and we compared its efficacy with that of ondansetron in preventing PONV . Assessment s on the occurrence of PONV were made at regular intervals for the first 24 h after tracheal extubation , along with sedation and pain scoring . We report a 6 % incidence of nausea and no incidence of vomiting in the midazolam group , compared with a 21 % incidence of PONV in the ondansetron group(P < 0.001).All 21 patients ( 18 women and 3 men ) in the ondansetron group and none of the 6 patients ( all women ) in the midazolam group required a rescue anti-emetic drug ( P < 0.001 ) . The sedation scores and postoperative pain scores were comparable in both groups . We conclude that midazolam , instituted as a continuous infusion in a dose of 0.02 mg · kg−1 · h−1 , is a more effective antiemetic than ondansetron in a dose of 0.1 mg/kg IV every 6 h for the prevention of PONV after cardiac surgery The effect of a bolus and continuous infusion of midazolam on postoperative morphine consumption was assed in a placebo‐controlled , double‐blind , r and omly allocated trial of 50 patients undergoing elective abdominal hysterectomy . Patients in the trial group received a bolus dose of midazolam 5 mg.70 kg‐1 at induction followed by an infusion at a rate of 1 mg.70 kg h‐1 over the next 48h . Morphine consumption in the midazolam group was scientifically lower in the first 12 h postoperatively . ( p < 0.02 ) but there was no significant difference between the two groups thereafter . Patients in the midazolam treated group had lower pain scores over the first 24 h. Also , a significantly greater number of patients in the midazolam group required no antiemetic medication over the 48 h study period ( p < 0.05 ) . Assessment of sedation revealed no significant difference between groups . We conclude that low dose midazolam has a significant , but short‐lived , morphine sparing effect Aims : The efficacy of using midazolam or haloperidol for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) has been investigated before . The main object of the present study was to evaluate the anti-emetic effects of combining administration of intravenous haloperidol with intravenous midazolam on PONV in patients underwent middle ear surgery in comparison with using each drug alone . Methods : Study design was r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled . 80 patients , aged 18 - 60 years , scheduled for middle ear surgery in Kashani Hospital Medical Center under general anesthesia were enrolled in this r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled study . Patients were divided into 4 groups of 20 each and received haloperidol 2 mg i.v . ( Group H ) ; midazolam 2 mg i.v . ( Group M ) ; haloperidol 2 mg plus midazolam 2 mg i.v . ( Group HM ) ; saline i.v . ( Group C ) . The incidences of PONV and complete response were evaluated at 0 - 2 hours after arrival to the PACU and 2 - 24 hours after arrival to the ward in 4 groups . Results : Patients in group HM had significantly lower incidence of PONV compared with groups H , M , and C throughout 0 - 24 h ( P<00.5 ) . The HM group had the lowest incidence of PONV ( 0 - 2 , 2 - 24 , and 0 - 24 h ) and the highest incidence of complete response . Postoperative anti-emetic requirement was significantly less in group HM compared with group M or H ( P<0.05 ) . Conclusion : Combine administration of haloperidol 2 mg plus midazolam 2 mg significantly reduced PONV better than using each drug alone in patients underwent middle ear surgery under general anesthesia BACKGROUND Postoperative nausea and vomiting is a high unpleasant symptom in surgical procedures . This study compares the effectiveness of midazolam with promethazine as multi purpose drug in postoperative nausea and vomiting as a preoperative and anesthetic medication after appendectomy . Methods : This r and omized , double - blind clinical trial study was performed in patients who underwent appendectomy . These patients r and omly received either placebo or midazolam or promethazine 5 minutes before appendectomy . All episodes of vomiting and nausea within 24 hours after surgery were recorded . The study population ( N=75 ) comprised 3 comparable subgroups ( N=25 in each group ) . A st and ard general anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were used . The data were collected and analyzed . RESULTS Vomiting and nausea occurred in 19.20 % , 0 % and 81.80 % of the patients in the midazolam , promethazine and placebo groups , respectively . The frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting was as follows : the first 6 hours after surgery 0 % , 0 % and 50 % , during the second 6 hours after surgery 19 % , 0 % and 19 % , during the third 6 hours after surgery 0 % , 0 % and 7 % , during the fourth 6 hours after surgery 0 % , 0 % and 4 % in the midazolam , promethazine and placebo groups , respectively . There were no significant differences between promethazine with midazolam in reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting . CONCLUSION Our study suggests that midazolam can be used as multi purpose drugs in postoperative nausea and vomiting as a preoperative medication after appendectomy and treatment using midazolam for anti-emetic , prophylaxis provide a similar effect compared to promethazine in the present study Sixty patients were r and omly allocated in an open study to receive either midazolam or diazepam ( Diazemuls ) with fentanyl and etomi date for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia during day-stay gynaecological surgery . The excitatory effects of etomi date were controlled by the benzodiazepine-fentanyl combination in both groups . No significant difference in the quality of recovery ( as judged by Trieger test analysis ) , amnesia , incidence of recall of pain on injection of etomi date or nausea and vomiting could be demonstrated between the groups . There was a high degree ( 97 % ) of patient acceptance The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of midazolam on vomiting after  tonsillectomy in children . We compared 215 children aged 1.5 - 14 yr undergoing tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy under general anaesthesia with nitrous oxide and halothane .  In a double-blind fashion the subjects were administered either placebo or midazolam 75 micrograms.kg-1 iv after induction of anaesthesia . After the operation , the number of emetic episodes and the length of stay in hospital were recorded . The groups were similar with respect to age , weight , sex , mode of induction , duration of anaesthesia , surgical procedure , opioid administration and length of stay in the PAR and the Day Care Surgical Unit . The 108 midazolam-treated children had a lower incidence ( 42 % vs 57 % ) of vomiting than the placebo group , P < 0.02 . The placebo group had a higher incidence ( 9 % vs 2 % ) of unscheduled admissions to hospital due to nausea and vomiting , P < 0.05 . It is concluded that midazolam administered intravenously to children intraoperatively reduces vomiting after tonsillectomy STUDY OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of midazolam on the global perioperative experience , including patient satisfaction , postoperative nausea and vomiting , postoperative pain , and perioperative anxiety and amnesia .  DESIGN Prospect i ve , r and omized , placebo-controlled study . SETTING Ambulatory surgical center affiliated with a tertiary-care hospital . PATIENTS 88 ASA physical status I , II , and III patients scheduled for outpatient surgery . INTERVENTIONS Patients were r and omized into two groups to receive either 0.04 mg/kg of midazolam or placebo intravenously ( IV ) 20 minutes preoperatively . MEASUREMENTS Perioperative measurements included blood pressure , heart rate , and oxygen saturation and the patient 's level of anxiety ; type of anesthetic administered ; the anesthesiologist 's guess at the treatment arm ; perioperative dosages of fentanyl , morphine , and ondansetron ; recovery room length of stay ; frequency of nausea and vomiting , and level of postoperative pain in the 24 hours after surgery ; the patient 's overall satisfaction with the anesthetic , and whether the patient would recommend the premedication to a friend . MAIN RESULTS Patient demographics , type of surgery/anesthesia , vital signs , case duration , recovery duration , and postoperative pain were all similar between the midazolam and placebo groups . As expected , IV midazolam was an effective anxiolytic . There was no evidence of retro grade amnesia . Fewer patients in the midazolam group suffered from postoperative nausea than did those in the placebo group ( 25%vs . 50%;p = 0.03 ) , despite receiving similar perioperative antiemetic and opioid administration . Similarly , fewer patients in the midazolam group experienced postoperative vomiting than placebo group patients ( 8%vs . 21 % ) , although this difference did not reach statistical significance . Only 42 % of patients in the placebo group would recommend their premedication to a friend , compared with 85 % of patients in the midazolam group ( p < 0.001 ) . CONCLUSIONS In addition to the known anxiolytic effects of midazolam , midazolam premedication is an effective way to reduce the frequency of postoperative nausea , and perhaps vomiting , and increase patient satisfaction OBJECTIVE To evaluate and compare the efficacy of the combination of midazolam and dexamethasone , with midazolam and dexamethasone alone , for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) in female patients undergoing middle ear surgery . METHODS A prospect i ve , r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled study in 80 female patients ( mean age 32.6 years ) , undergoing middle ear surgery with general anesthesia at Ohud Hospital , Madina , Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from May 2007 to May 2008 . Patients were classified into 4 groups . They received intravenous normal saline ( S group ) , midazolam 0.075 mg/kg ( M group ) , or dexamethasone 10 mg ( D group ) , or a combination of midazolam and dexamethasone ( MD group ) , before the induction of anesthesia . Postoperatively for 24 hours observation and assessment of nausea , vomiting , rescue anti-emetics , and side effects of the study drugs such as headache and drowsiness were carried out . RESULTS There was a significant difference between the 4 groups . The MD group was the least to develop PONV compared to other groups ( p<0.01 ) . Regarding nausea , there was a non-significant difference between the 4 groups , although the MD group developed the least symptoms among the 4 groups , there were no significant differences in pain intensity and side effects such as , headache , dizziness , and drowsiness between the 4 groups . CONCLUSION The combination of midazolam 0.075 mg/kg and dexamethasone 10 mg intravenously is better than either drug alone in reducing the incidence of PONV in female patients after middle ear surgery Objectives This r and omized , double-blind study compared the antiemetic efficacy of ramosetron with that of ramosetron combined with midazolam , and investigated whether the timing of midazolam administration affected the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) . Methods N 
    Output:
    
: Perioperative administration of midazolam was effective in preventing PON , POV , and PONV