Comparative study of conventional anesthesia technique versus computerized system anesthesia: a randomized clinical trial

被引:11
作者
Berrendero, S. [1 ]
Hriptulova, O. [2 ]
Salido, M. P. [1 ]
Martinez-Rus, F. [1 ]
Pradies, G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Complutense Madrid, Fac Dent, Dept Conservat Dent & Prostheses, Plaza Ramon y Cajal,S-N Ciudad Univ, Madrid 28040, Spain
[2] Univ Complutense Madrid, Fac Dent, Madrid, Spain
关键词
Calaject system; Computer-delivery anesthesia; Dental anesthesia; Electronic anesthesia; Local anesthesia; Pain; TRADITIONAL LOCAL-ANESTHESIA; PAIN PERCEPTION; INTRAOSSEOUS ANESTHESIA; INJECTION PAIN; PERCEIVED PAIN; WAND; SYRINGE; CHILDREN; EFFICACY; DELIVERY;
D O I
10.1007/s00784-020-03553-5
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective The aim of the present study was to compare in terms of pain perception the use of conventional anesthesia and a computerized system. Materials and methods Forty patients in need for extractions, dental restorative, or periodontal treatment bilaterally, were selected. Each patient served as his/her own control being subjected to two anesthesia techniques: conventional and electronically controlled anesthesia with Calaject (R) (Ronvig Dental MFG, Daugaard, Denmark). Each patient received both treatments in a blind way 1 week apart. The order was previously randomized. After performing the anesthesia (upper dental nerve, palatal posterior nerve, or inferior alveolar nerve), the patients evaluated their pain sensation with a visual analogue scale (VAS) (0-10). After treatment, the patients were asked about the presence of pain during the procedure. Finally, the patients selected their preference between the conventional and electronic anesthesia technique. Differences in assessment of pain's injection were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test and the Kruskal-Wallis test (alpha = 0.05). Results The mean general pain experienced was 3.73 (1.55 SD) for the conventional anesthesia, and 1.95 (0.53 SD) for computerized anesthesia. Statistical differences (p < 0.05) were found. There was no difference between the treatments (pvalue = 0.061). Most patients did not feel any pain during the treatment. Finally, 92.5% of the patients preferred the electronic system. Conclusions Computerized anesthesia system produces significantly less pain compared with a conventional anesthesia syringe. Although both obtained sufficient anesthetic depth to perform treatments, the majority of patients chose electronic anesthesia as the most satisfactory.
引用
收藏
页码:2307 / 2315
页数:9
相关论文
共 55 条
[11]   A Comparative Study of Children's Pain Reactions and Perceptions to AMSA Injection using CCLAD versus Traditional Injections [J].
Feda, May ;
Al Amoudi, Najlaa ;
Sharaf, Aly ;
Hanno, Azza ;
Farsi, Najat ;
Masoud, Ibrahim ;
Almushyt, Abdullah .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY, 2010, 34 (03) :217-222
[12]   Pain assessment in infants and children [J].
Franck, LS ;
Greenberg, CS ;
Stevens, B .
PEDIATRIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2000, 47 (03) :487-+
[13]  
Friedman M J, 1997, Compend Contin Educ Dent, V18, P995
[14]  
Friedman MJ, 1997, COMPEND CONTIN ED DE, V18, P1004
[15]   Pain Experience and Behavior Management in Pediatric Dentistry: A Comparison between Traditional Local Anesthesia and the Wand Computerized Delivery System [J].
Garret-Bernardin, Annelyse ;
Cantile, Tiziana ;
D'Anto, Vincenzo ;
Galanakis, Alexandros ;
Fauxpoint, Gabriel ;
Ferrazzano, Gianmaria Fabrizio ;
De Rosa, Sara ;
Vallogini, Giulia ;
Romeo, Umberto ;
Galeotti, Angela .
PAIN RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT, 2017, 2017
[16]   Computerized local dental anesthetic systems: patient and dentist satisfaction [J].
Grace, EG ;
Barnes, DM ;
Reid, BC ;
Flores, M ;
George, DL .
JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2003, 31 (01) :9-12
[17]  
Hochman M, 1997, N Y State Dent J, V63, P24
[18]  
Jälevik B, 2014, SWED DENT J, V38, P67
[19]  
Jones C M, 1995, Int J Paediatr Dent, V5, P81
[20]   Clinical efficacy of a computerised device (STA™) and a pressure syringe (VarioJect INTRA™) for intraligamentary anaesthesia [J].
Kaemmerer, P. W. ;
Schiegnitz, E. ;
von Haussen, T. ;
Shabazfar, N. ;
Kaemmerer, P. ;
Willershausen, B. ;
Al-Nawas, B. ;
Daublaender, M. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DENTAL EDUCATION, 2015, 19 (01) :16-22