• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.38 no.1
• /
• pp.1-8
• /
• 2011

The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of topical 5% EMLA cream versus 20% Benzocaine gel in reducing pain from intra oral needle insertion alone as well as injection of anesthetic. The 2 topical anesthetics were tested against each other bilaterally using a randomized, controlled, single blinded, split mouth design. Phase I was conducted to find out the rapidity of onset action of the two agents on anterior/posterior vestibules and anterior/posterior palatal mucosa. Phase II was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of the two topical anaesthetic agents in reducing the pain of intraoral injections. The agents were left in anterior/posterior vestibules and anterior/posterior palatal mucosa for the amount of time recorded in phase I. Subjects recorded pain on a 100-mm modified visual analog scale(VAS). A pulse oximeter was used to recorded the preoperative and postoperative pulse rates. In phase I of the study, two topical agents showed the longer onset of action at anterior part and vestibules than posterior part and palatal mucosa. EMLA cream showed the rapidest onset of action compared to benzocaine gel except on anterior palatal mucosa. In phase II of the study, the VAS grading of the pain for anesthetic administration showed EMLA cream was significantly(P<.05) better in elimination or reducing the pain on the anterior/posterior palatal mucosa. In conclusion, EMLA cream showed the rapidest onset of action compared to benzocaine gel except on anterior palatal mucosa. EMLA cream was found to be superior to Benzocaine gel with regards to pain reduction for anesthetic administration especially on anterior and posterior palatal mucosa.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.91-99
• /
• 2024

Background: Palatal injections are often painful. We aimed to compare topical ice and 20% benzocaine gel for pre-injection anesthesia before greater palatine nerve block (GPNB) injections. Methods: A randomized split-mouth clinical trial was conducted among patients aged 15-60-years needing bilateral GPNB injections. A total of 120 palatal sites from 60 patients were randomly allocated to Group A (topical ice) or Group B (20% benzocaine gel). Pain was evaluated using sound, eye, motor (SEM), and the visual analog scale (VAS) in both groups. Inferential analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The mean age of the participants was 20.5 ± 3.9 years. The median VAS score for group A was 11 (Q1 - Q3: 5.25 - 21.75), which was slightly higher than the 10 (Q1 - Q3: 4.0 - 26.75) reported in group B. However, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.955). The median SEM score for group A and group B was 3.5 (Q1 - Q3: 3.0 - 4.0) and 4.0 (Q1 - Q3: 3.0 - 4.0), respectively, which was statistically insignificant (P = 0.869). Conclusion: Using ice as a form of topical anesthetic for achieving pre-injection anesthesia before GPNB was as effective as 20% benzocaine gel.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.29-37
• /
• 2020

Background: This study evaluated the efficacy of three intraoral topical anesthetics in reducing the injection needle prick pain from local anesthetic among children aged 7-11 years old. Methods: It is a prospective, Interventional, parallel design, single-blind, randomized clinical trial in which subjects (n=90) aged 7-11 years were included in the study based on an inclusion criteria. Subjects were divided into three groups based on computer-generated randomization with an allocation ratio of 1:1:1. Groups A, B, and C received benzocaine 20% jelly (Mucopain gel, ICPA health products Ltd, Ankleshwar, India), cetacaine anesthetic liquid (Cetylite Industries, Inc, Pennsauken, NJ), and EMLA cream (2% AstraZeneca UK Ltd, Luton, UK), respectively, according to manufacturer's instructions, for 1 minute prior to local anesthetic injection. After application of topical anesthetic agent, for all the groups, baseline pre-operative (prior to topical anesthetic administration) and post-operative scores (after local anesthetic administration) of pulse rate was recorded using Pulse oximeter (Gibson, Fingertip Pulse Oximeter, MD300C29, Beijing Choice Electronic). Peri-operative (i.e., during the administration of local anesthesia) scores were recorded using Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) Scale, Modified Children hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CPS) behavior rating scale, and Faces Pain Scale (FPS-R) - Revised (For self-reported pain). Direct self-reported and physiological measures were ascertained using FPS-R - Revised and Pulse oximeter, respectively, whereas CPS and FLACC scales assessed behavioral measures. To test the mean difference between the three groups, a one way ANOVA with post hoc tests was used. For statistical significance, a two-tailed probability value of P < 0.05 was considered as significant. Results: The Cetacaine group had significantly lower pain scores for self-report (P < 0.001), behavioral, and physiological measures (P < 0.001) than the other two groups. However, there was no significant difference between the Benzocaine group and EMLA group during palatal injection prick. Conclusion: Cetacaine can be considered as an effective topical anesthetic agent compared to benzocaine 20% jelly (Mucopain gel) and EMLA cream.

• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.18 no.5
• /
• pp.319-326
• /
• 2018

Although scaling is the primary method for improving oral health, it is also associated with dental fear. The objective of this study was to empirically verify whether the use of gel anesthetic within the gingival sulcus during scaling relieves pain and improves other factors. A total of 128 patients scheduled to undergo scaling at a dental clinic of a general hospital located in the Gyeonggi Province, between July 2014 and July 2015, were enrolled in the study. The participants underwent scaling following the application of 20% benzocaine gel or placebo gel anesthetic within the gingival sulcus, and the data was collected using a questionnaire. There was a significant difference in the severity of pain, participant satisfaction, perceived sensitivity, overall discomfort, and fear of scaling between the two groups. The two groups were compared in terms of perceived need for gel anesthesia, willingness to pay for anesthesia costs, and willingness to receive scaling in the future. There were significant differences in all the three parameters depending on whether gel anesthesia was used or not. There were significant differences between the two groups in perceived sensitivity immediately after scaling and one day after scaling, with no difference seen one week after scaling. With regards to overall discomfort over time, there were significant differences between the two groups immediately after scaling. Based on these findings, we expect that application of gel anesthetic within the gingival sulcus during scaling will reduce pain, perceived sensitivity, overall discomfort, and fear of scaling with increased satisfaction.