Table 1.

Overview of randomized controlled clinical trials comparing sedative agents

Study	Year	Medications	Patients	Results
Pohlman et al. [9]	1994	Lorazepam vs. midazolam	20 medical ICU patients	Trend to faster wake up with lorazepam
Swart et al. [10]	1999	Lorazepam vs. midazolam	64 medical ICU patients	Less expensive and more effective sedation with lorazepam
Kress et al. [11]	1996	Propofol vs. midazolam	73 medical ICU patients	Faster wake up and equally effective sedation with propofol
Chamorro et al. [12]	1996	Propofol vs. midazolam	98 medical ICU patients	Faster wake up and more effective sedation with propofol
Barrientos-Vega et al. [13]	1997	Propofol vs. midazolam	108 medical/surgical ICU patients	Equally effective and more cost-effective sedation, fewer days on mechanical ventilation with propofol
Weinbroum et al. [14]	1997	Propofol vs. midazolam	67 ICU patients	Equally effective sedation, midazolam more cost effective
Hall et al. [15]	2001	Propofol vs. midazolam	99 medical/surgical ICU patients	Fewer days on mechanical ventilation with propofol
Carson et al. [16]	2006	Propofol vs. midazolam	132 medical ICU patients	Fewer days on mechanical ventilation with propofol
Pandharipande et al. [17]	2007	Dexmedetomidine vs. lorazepam	106 medical/surgical ICU patients	Less delirium and coma and more on target sedation with dexmedetomidine
Riker et al. [18]	2009	Dexmedetomidine vs. midazolam	375 medical/surgical ICU patients	Less delirium and fewer days on mechanical ventilation with dexmedetomidine
Dasta et al. [19]	2010	Dexmedetomidine vs. midazolam	366 medical/surgical ICU patients	Lower total ICU costs with dexmedetomidine