Screen Time Works as Well as Sedatives in Calming Kids Down

Surprising zero parents, a new study finds that iPads have magical powers over children.

<a href="http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/reading-e-book-gm515810736-88676953?st=_p_childrenipad">Sasa Dinic</a>/iStock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Have you ever witnessed that wide-eyed, slack-jawed look that comes over children’s faces when they’re given a tablet computer to play with? Child psychologists have long warned that relying too much on “screen time” to appease kids could stunt their emotional development.

Parents and nurses were also more satisfied with the anesthesia procedure when the kids were given an iPad beforehand.

But what about kids who need to be calmed down for the sake of their health, like children who are about to go into surgery? Doctors often dose children with sedatives before they receive anesthesia. But new research shows that screen time may actually be a better option.

A new study by Dr. Dominique Chassard and colleagues at the Hôpital Mère-Enfant, part of the Hospices Civils de Lyon in France, concludes that iPads are just as effective at distracting kids from an upcoming surgery as conventional sedatives. Researchers looked at pediatric surgical patients between the ages of 4 and 10. Twenty minutes before they were given anesthesia, one group of kids was given a sedative called midazolam while the other group was given an iPad with age-appropriate games.

Two independent psychologists measured the patients’ anxiety at various stages before and after the surgery using a standard behavioral checklist. In the end, the levels of anxiety among both kids and their parents were similar in both groups, meaning electronic games were just as effective as the drugs. Parents and nurses were also more satisfied with the anesthesia procedure when the kids were given an iPad beforehand.

“Our study showed that child and parental anxiety before anesthesia are equally blunted by midazolam or use of the iPad,” Dr. Chassard said. “However, the quality of induction of anesthesia, as well as parental satisfaction, were judged better in the iPad group.”

For parents who use screen time as leverage to get their grumpy kids to do just about anything, these results may come as no surprise.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate