DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Making inferior alveolar nerve block more comfortable via computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery: A prospective clinical study

  • Gajendragadkar, Kunal (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth) ;
  • Bhate, Kalyani (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth) ;
  • Jagtap, Bhagyashree (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth) ;
  • Santhoshkumar, S.N (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth) ;
  • Kshirsagar, Kapil (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth) ;
  • Magoo, Surabhi (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth)
  • Received : 2019.03.26
  • Accepted : 2019.06.17
  • Published : 2019.06.30

Abstract

Background: The fear of needle insertion and pain during anesthesia is a source of patient dissatisfaction in dentistry. Inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) remains the most common type of block and is in itself painful. Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) has been proven to reduce the pain associated with injection of anesthetics in various blocks. However, the efficacy of CCLAD for IANB in adults remains unknown. Methods: Sixty-four adult patients requiring bilateral IANB were selected and divided into two groups: group A (50 patients receiving IANB via CCLAD) and group B (50 patients receiving IANB using a conventional cartridge syringe). Pain perception and patient comfort were assessed using the visual analog scale and the 5-point semantic scale, respectively. Results: The pain perception was compared between the two groups using the Mann-Whitney U-test, and the P value was 0.003. The patient comfort was also compared using the same test, and the P value was 0.484. Conclusion: A significant difference was observed in the pain perception of the patients during CCLAD. The patient comfort was grossly equal for both techniques.

Keywords

References

  1. Milgrom P, Newton JT, Boyle C, Heaton LJ, Donaldson N. The Effects Of Dental Anxiety And Irregular Attendance On Referral For Dental Treatment Under Sedation Within The National Health Service In London. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2010; 38: 453-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2010.00552.x
  2. Kaufman E, Epstein JB, Naveh E, Gorsky M, Gross A, Cohen G. A Survey of Pain, Pressure, and Discomfort Induced by Commonly Used Oral Local Anesthesia Injections. Anesth Prog 2005; 52: 122-7. https://doi.org/10.2344/0003-3006(2005)52[122:ASP]2.0.CO;2
  3. Milgrom P, Coldwell SE, Getz T, Weinstein P, Ramsay DS. Four dimensions of fear of dental injections. J Am Dent Assoc 1997; 128: 756-66. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1997.0301
  4. Hochman MN, Friedman MJ, Williams W, Hochman CB. Interstitial tissue pressure associated with dental injections: A clinical study. Quintessence Int 2006; 37: 469-76.
  5. Walmsley AD, Lloyd JM, Harrington E. Pressures produced in vitro during intraligamentary anaesthesia. Br Dent J 1989; 167: 341-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4807030
  6. Kwak EJ, Pang NS, Cho JH, Jung BY, Kim KD, Park W. Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery for painless anesthesia: a literature review. J Dent Anesth Pain Med 2016; 16: 81-8. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2016.16.2.81
  7. Lesaffre E, Philstrom B, Needleman I, Worthington H. The design and analysis of split-mouth studies: What statisticians and clinicians should know. Stat Med 2009; 28: 3470-82. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3634
  8. Hochman MN, Friedman MJ. In vitro study of needle deflection: A linear insertion technique versus a bidirectional rotation insertion technique. Quintessence Int 2000; 31: 33-9.
  9. Tandon N, Kalra S, Balhara YPS, Baruah MP, Chadha M, Chandalia HB, et al. Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations, India: The Indian Recommendations for Best Practice in Insulin Injection Technique, 2017. Indian J Endocrinol Metab 2017; 21: 600-17. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijem.IJEM_97_17
  10. Seligman LD, Hovey JD, Chacon K, Ollendick TH. Dental anxiety: An understudied problem in youth. Clin Psychol Rev 2017; 55: 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2017.04.004
  11. Moore R, Brodsgaard I, Rosenberg N. The contribution of embarrassment to phobic dental anxiety: a qualitative research study. BMC Psychiatry 2004; 4: 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-4-10
  12. Takahashi H, Ban M, Asada M. Semantic differential scale method can reveal multi-dimensional aspects of mind perception. Front Psychol 2016; 7: 1717.
  13. Yenisey M. Comparison of the pain levels of computer controlled and conventional anesthesia techniques in prosthodontic treatment. J Appl Oral Sci 2009; 17: 414-20. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572009000500012
  14. Doig GS, Simpson F. Randomization and allocation concealment: a practical guide for researchers. J Crit Care 2005; 20: 187-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2005.04.005
  15. Klimek L, Bergmann KC, Biedermann T, Bousquet J, Hellings P, Jung K, et al. Visual analogue scales (VAS): Measuring instruments for the documentation of symptoms and therapy monitoring in cases of allergic rhinitis in everyday health care. Allergo J Int 2017; 26: 16-24.
  16. Feda M, Al Amoudi N, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N, Masoud I, et al. A Comparative Study of Children's Pain Reactions and Perceptions to AMSA Injection using CCLAD versus Traditional Injections. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2010; 34: 217-22. https://doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.34.3.3201l74255560520
  17. Yogesh Kumar TD, John JB, Asokan S, Geetha Priya PR, Punithavathy R, Praburajan V. Behavioral response and pain perception to computer controlled local anesthetic delivery system and cartridge syringe. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2015; 33: 223-8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.160394
  18. Baghlaf K, Alamoudi N, Elashiry E, Farsi N, El Derwi DA, Abdullah AM. The pain-related behavior and pain perception associated with computerized anesthesia in pulpotomies of mandibular primary molars: A randomized controlled trial. Quientessance Int 2015; 46: 799-806.
  19. Chang H, Noh J, Lee J, Kim S, Koo KT, Kim TI, et al. Relief of Injection Pain During the Delivery of Local Anesthesia by Computer-Controlled Anesthetic Delivery System for Periodontal Surgery: Randomised Clinical Controlled Trial. J Periodontol 2016; 87: 783-9 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2016.150448
  20. Sumer M, Misir F, Koyuturk AE. Comparison of the Wand with a conventional technique. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 101: 106-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.12.002

Cited by

  1. Patient evaluations after local anesthesia with a computer-assisted method and a conventional syringe before and after reflection time: A prospective randomized controlled trial vol.7, pp.2, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06012
  2. DentalVibe reduces pain during the administration of local anesthetic injection in comparison to 2% lignocaine gel: results from a clinical study vol.21, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2021.21.1.41