A comparative assessment of efficacy and preference between needleless device INJEX and insulin syringe for anesthetizing primary maxillary teeth in children aged 4-9 years: A split-mouth crossover randomized clinical study.

Q3 Dentistry
Megha Patel, Rohan Bhatt, Miral Mehta, Chhaya Patel, Foram Patel, Disha Makwani
{"title":"A comparative assessment of efficacy and preference between needleless device INJEX and insulin syringe for anesthetizing primary maxillary teeth in children aged 4-9 years: A split-mouth crossover randomized clinical study.","authors":"Megha Patel,&nbsp;Rohan Bhatt,&nbsp;Miral Mehta,&nbsp;Chhaya Patel,&nbsp;Foram Patel,&nbsp;Disha Makwani","doi":"10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_199_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>insulin syringe for anesthetizing primary maxillary teeth in children aged 4-9 years.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This randomized clinical study included 46 children aged 4-9 years. The patients were digitally allotted to receive 4% articaine for extractions of primary maxillary teeth, either using needleless device INJEX or insulin syringe on each side of the maxillary arch, in two different appointments after a 1-week washout period. Pain perception was measured by the subjective (Faces Pain Scale-Revised [FPS-R]) and objective pain scores (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability [FLACC]) and hemodynamic parameters (heart rate and oxygen saturation) during LA administration and during extractions. After the second appointment, children were asked about their preference between needleless device INJEX and insulin syringe.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On evaluating subjective pain scores with FPS-R, intergroup differences between the INJEX and insulin syringe groups were found statistically insignificant, both during LA administration (P = 0.101) and extraction (P = 0.080). However, on assessing pain objectively during extraction using FLACC, the mean pain score was less with insulin syringe (2.78) as compared to INJEX (4.72) and the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.000). There was no significant difference in patient preference between the two methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pain perception was minimal during local anesthesia administration using needleless device INJEX; however, its clinical efficacy during extractions was reported to be lower than insulin syringe.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Managing pain in children is the most challenging task as it forms the foundation for instilling positive behavior toward dental treatment. Adequate local anesthesia (LA) is the cornerstone of pain management. However, the fear of needles, particularly in young children, can result in complete avoidance and refusal of treatment.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and preference between needleless device INJEX and.</p>","PeriodicalId":35797,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_199_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

insulin syringe for anesthetizing primary maxillary teeth in children aged 4-9 years.

Materials and methods: This randomized clinical study included 46 children aged 4-9 years. The patients were digitally allotted to receive 4% articaine for extractions of primary maxillary teeth, either using needleless device INJEX or insulin syringe on each side of the maxillary arch, in two different appointments after a 1-week washout period. Pain perception was measured by the subjective (Faces Pain Scale-Revised [FPS-R]) and objective pain scores (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability [FLACC]) and hemodynamic parameters (heart rate and oxygen saturation) during LA administration and during extractions. After the second appointment, children were asked about their preference between needleless device INJEX and insulin syringe.

Results: On evaluating subjective pain scores with FPS-R, intergroup differences between the INJEX and insulin syringe groups were found statistically insignificant, both during LA administration (P = 0.101) and extraction (P = 0.080). However, on assessing pain objectively during extraction using FLACC, the mean pain score was less with insulin syringe (2.78) as compared to INJEX (4.72) and the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.000). There was no significant difference in patient preference between the two methods.

Conclusion: Pain perception was minimal during local anesthesia administration using needleless device INJEX; however, its clinical efficacy during extractions was reported to be lower than insulin syringe.

Background: Managing pain in children is the most challenging task as it forms the foundation for instilling positive behavior toward dental treatment. Adequate local anesthesia (LA) is the cornerstone of pain management. However, the fear of needles, particularly in young children, can result in complete avoidance and refusal of treatment.

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and preference between needleless device INJEX and.

无针装置INJEX和胰岛素注射器麻醉4-9岁儿童上颌乳牙的疗效和偏好的比较评估:一项分口交叉随机临床研究。
胰岛素注射器用于麻醉4-9岁儿童的上颌乳牙。材料和方法:这项随机临床研究包括46名4-9岁的儿童。在为期1周的冲洗期后,在两个不同的预约中,患者被数字分配接受4%阿替卡因,用于上颌初级牙齿的拔除,方法是在上颌弓两侧使用无针装置INJEX或胰岛素注射器。在左心房给药和拔出期间,通过主观(Faces Pain Scale Revisited[FPS-R])和客观疼痛评分(Face、Legs、Activity、Cry和Consolability[FLACC])以及血液动力学参数(心率和血氧饱和度)测量疼痛感知。第二次预约后,孩子们被问及他们对无针设备INJEX和胰岛素注射器的偏好。结果:在用FPS-R评估主观疼痛评分时,INJEX和胰岛素注射器组之间的组间差异在LA给药期间(P=0.101)和提取期间(P=0.080)均无统计学意义。然而,在使用FLACC客观评估提取期间的疼痛时,胰岛素注射器的平均疼痛评分(2.78)低于INJEX(4.72),差异具有统计学意义(P=0.000)。两种方法的患者偏好没有显著差异。结论:在使用INJEX无针装置进行局部麻醉时,疼痛感觉最小;然而,据报道,其在提取过程中的临床疗效低于胰岛素注射器。背景:管理儿童的疼痛是最具挑战性的任务,因为它为灌输积极的牙科治疗行为奠定了基础。充分的局部麻醉(LA)是疼痛管理的基石。然而,对针头的恐惧,尤其是对幼儿的恐惧,会导致完全避免和拒绝治疗。目的:本研究旨在评估和比较无针装置INJEX和。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
39 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry (ISSN - 0970-4388) is the official organ of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. The journal publishes original articles and case reports pertaining to pediatric and preventive dentistry.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信