Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine

The Korean Dental Society of Anesthsiology (대한치과마취과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative evaluation of efficacy of Physics Forceps versus conventional forceps in pediatric dental extractions: a prospective randomized study

  • Elicherla, Sainath Reddy (Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Narayana Dental College and Hospital) ;
  • Bandi, Sujatha (Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Narayana Dental College and Hospital) ;
  • Nunna, Mahesh (Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Narayana Dental College and Hospital) ;
  • Saikiran, Kanamarlapudi Venkata (Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Sri Venkata Sai Institute of Dental Sciences) ;
  • Sahithi, Varada (Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Narayana Dental College and Hospital) ;
  • Nuvvula, Sivakumar (Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Narayana Dental College and Hospital)
  • Received : 2021.08.08
  • Accepted : 2021.10.07
  • Published : 2021.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to determine the efficacy of Physics Forceps in pediatric dental extractions. Methods: This was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial with a parallel-arm design and identical allocation ratio (1:1). Children (n=104) were randomly divided into two groups for extraction of mandibular primary teeth (group I: Physics Forceps; group II: conventional forceps). The outcome variables assessed in the study were the time taken for extraction, pre- and postoperative anxiety (using RMS pictorial scale), incidence of fractured teeth, and postoperative pain on the first and third days (using the Wong-Baker faces pain scale). Results: A significant reduction (P < 0.001) in intraoperative time, anxiety, and incidence of tooth fracture was confined to group I. The pain significantly reduced from the first to the third postoperative day in both groups, but the mean reduction in RMS scores in the physics forceps group was far better than that in the conventional forceps group. Conclusion: Physics Forceps aid in extraction of primary teeth with minimal trauma to supporting structures, as well as reducing anxiety in the pediatric population.

Keywords

References

  1. Featherstone JD. The science and practice of caries prevention. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 131: 887-99. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0307
  2. Fejerskov O and Kidd E. (eds) Dental caries: the disease and its clinical management (2nd edition). Blackwell/Monksgaard, 2008.
  3. Kidd EA, Fejerskov O. What constitutes dental caries? Histopathology of carious enamel and dentin related to the action of cariogenic biofilms. J Dent Res 2004; 83: C35-8.
  4. Axelsson P. Diagnosis and registration of carious lesions. In Diagnosis and risk prediction of dental caries, Vol. 2. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Company, Inc., 2000: 208-47.
  5. Carvalho JC. Caries process on occlusal surfaces: evolving evidence and understanding. Caries Res 2014; 48: 339-46. https://doi.org/10.1159/000356307
  6. King NM, Anthonappa RP, Itthagarun A. The importance of the primary dentition to children - Part 2: effects of treating carious teeth by extraction. Hong Kong Pract 2007; 29: 101-7.
  7. Alsheneifi T, Hughes CV. Reasons for dental extractions in children. Pediatr Dent 2001; 23: 109-12.
  8. Dym H, Weiss A. Exodontia: tips and techniques for better outcomes. Dent Clin North Am 2012; 56: 245-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2011.07.002
  9. McKenzie WS. Principles of exodontia. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2020; 32: 511-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2020.06.001
  10. Pala SP, Nuvvula S, Kamatham R. Expression of pain and distress in children during dental extractions through drawings as a projective measure: a clinical study. World J Pediatr 2016; 5: 102-11. https://doi.org/10.5409/wjcp.v5.i1.102
  11. Mathias FB, Cademartori MG, Goettems ML. Factors associated with children's perception of pain following dental treatment. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2020; 21: 137-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-019-00456-2
  12. Al-Harbi SH. Minimizing trauma during tooth removal: a systematic sectioning approach. Eur J Esthet Dent 2010; 5: 274-87.
  13. Raghu K, Selvakumar SR, Muthukumar R, Thangavelu A, Sathyanarayanan R, Mani M, et al. Beak and bumper - physics forceps: evaluation of new technique in extraction. Indian J Dent Res 2020; 31: 4-13. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_433_18
  14. Scull P. Beak and bumper. The Dentist 2010; 6: 56-61.
  15. Wright GZ, Alpern GD, Leake JL. A cross-validation of the variables affecting children's co-operative behaviour. J Can Dent Assoc (Tor) 1973; 39: 268-73.
  16. Perkins NJ, Perez MH, Misch EC, Golden R. The Physics Forceps-A Breakthrough In Dental Extraction Technology. Posters/Br J Maxillofac Surg 2010; 48: 25-55.
  17. Nicholas C, Jaime LL, Joseph YK. Extraction Defect: Assessment, Classification and Management. Int J Clin Implant Dent 2009; 1: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10004-1026
  18. Misch CE, Perez HM. Atraumatic extractions: a biomechanical rationale. Dent Today 2008; 27: 100-1.
  19. Dym H, Weiss A. Exodontia: Tips and techniques for better outcome. Dent Clin N Am 2012; 56: 245-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2011.07.002
  20. Pilare K. Physics forceps-a new revolution in exodontia. Int J Curr Res 2017; 9: 51218-20.
  21. Venkateshwar GP, Padhye MN, Khosla AR, Kakkar ST. Complications of exodontia: a retrospective study. Indian J Dent Res 2011; 22: 633-8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.93447
  22. Donly KJ, Castellano J. Introduction to a novel extraction forceps. Pediatr Dent 2001; 23: 361-2.
  23. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Management considerations for oral surgery and oral pathology. Pediatr Dent 2017; 39: 361-70.
  24. Oosterink FM, De Jongh A, Aartman IH. What are people afraid of during dental treatment? Anxiety-provoking capacity of 67 stimuli characteristic of the dental setting. Eur J Oral Sci 2008; 116: 44-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2007.00500.x
  25. Balmer R, O'Sullivan EA, Pollard MA, Curzon ME. Anxiety related to dental general anaesthesia: changes in anxiety in children and their parents. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2004; 5: 9-14.
  26. Schneider A, Andrade J, Tanja-Dijkstra K, White M, Moles DR. The psychological cycle behind dental appointment attendance: a cross-sectional study of experiences, anticipations and behavioral intentions. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2016; 44: 364-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdoe.12221
  27. Hu YH, Tsai A, Ou-Yang LW, Chuang LC, Chang PC. Postoperative dental morbidity in children following dental treatment under general anesthesia. BMC oral health 2018; 18: 84. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0545-z
  28. Basheer SA. Comparative evaluation between physics forceps and conventional extraction forceps in extraction of maxillary molars. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2017; 3: 152-4.
  29. Patel HS, Managutti AM, Menat S, Agarwal A, Shah D, Patel J. Comparative evaluation of efficacy of physics forceps versus conventional forceps in orthodontic extractions: a prospective randomized split mouth study. J Clin Diagn Res 2016; 10: 41-5.
  30. El-Kenawy MH, Ahmed WM. Comparison between physics and conventional forceps in simple dental extraction. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2015; 14: 949-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-015-0765-6
  31. Mandal S, Gupta S, Mittal A, Garg R. Collate on the ability of physics forceps v/s conventional forceps in multirooted mandibular tooth extractions. IOSR-JDMS 2015; 14: 63-6.
  32. Lingaraj J, Balihallimathm DS, Inamdar A. Comparison of physics forceps and conventional extraction forceps in orthodontic extraction of upper premolars. Int J Recent Sci Res 2017; 8: 19149-52.
  33. Buhren BA, Schrumpf H, Hoff NP, Bolke E, Hilton S, Gerber PA. Hyaluronidase: from clinical applications to molecular and cellular mechanisms. Eur J Med Res 2016; 21: 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-016-0201-5
  34. Shetty RM, Khandelwal M, Rath S. RMS Pictorial Scale (RMS-PS): an innovative scale for the assessment of child's dental anxiety. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2015; 33: 48-52. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.149006
  35. Aminabadi NA, Oskouei SG, Farahani RM. Dental treatment duration as an indicator of the behavior of 3-to 9-year-old pediatric patients in clinical dental settings. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009; 10: E025-32.
  36. Jamali Z, Najafpour E, Ebrahim Adhami Z, Sighari Deljavan A, Aminabadi NA, Shirazi S. Does the length of dental procedure influence children's behavior during and after treatment? A systematic review and critical appraisal. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2018; 12: 68-76. https://doi.org/10.15171/joddd.2018.011
  37. Tomlinson D, von Baeyer CL, Stinson JN, Sung L. A systematic review of faces scales for the self-report of pain intensity in children. Pediatrics 2010; 126: e1168-98. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2010-1609
  38. Hariharan S, Narayanan V, Soh C. Split-mouth comparison of Physics forceps and extraction forceps in orthodontic extraction of upper premolars. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 52: e137-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2014.06.013
  39. Kosinski T. Use of innovative physics forceps for extraction in preparation of dental implants. Implant News Views 2012; 14: 1-9.