Philipp Luhrenberg, Mirjam Renders, Diana Heimes, Anke Hollinderbäumer, Sebahat Kaya, Solomiya Kyyak, Saskia V Schröger, Daniel G E Thiem, Helen Wagner, Peer W Kämmerer
{"title":"Evaluation of dental students' learning curve in intraligamentary anesthesia using different syringe systems: A prospective crossover study.","authors":"Philipp Luhrenberg, Mirjam Renders, Diana Heimes, Anke Hollinderbäumer, Sebahat Kaya, Solomiya Kyyak, Saskia V Schröger, Daniel G E Thiem, Helen Wagner, Peer W Kämmerer","doi":"10.1002/jdd.13754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose/objectives: </strong>This prospective crossover preclinical trial aimed to evaluate the learning curve of dental students in successfully administering intraligamentary anesthesia (ILA) using three different syringe systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dental students performed ILA using three devices in two separate sessions, each targeting mandibular and/or maxillary premolars. The devices included two manual systems (pistol-type and lever-based) and one computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD). The primary research parameter was the success rate of anesthesia, defined as the percentage of successful ILA administrations confirmed by a negative response to a cold test. Secondary parameters included pain experienced during needle penetration and injection, students' self-reported levels of mental tension and handling of the syringes, and any potential side effects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 110 students performed ILA on 599 teeth during the study period. When comparing the CCLAD system to the manual syringes, the CCLAD system exhibited a significantly higher overall success rate in the first session (92.5% vs. 77.4%; p < 0.001), potentially due to its precise control of anesthetic flow and pressure, which likely facilitated more effective anesthetic delivery. However, when examining the individual manual techniques, no significant difference was found between the pistol-type manual and the CCLAD system (p = 0.66). All techniques' success rate increased from the first to the second session (80.4% vs. 86.9%; p = 0.0357). Additionally, penetration pain demonstrated a significant decrease across all techniques (p < 0.01). Notably, students' anxiety levels decreased, and self-assurance increased significantly over the sessions. Undesired reversible side effects were documented in 10.9% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest that repeated practice of ILA, particularly with different syringe systems, enhances anesthetic success and psychological readiness for patient interaction. Additional training sessions may further improve proficiency.</p>","PeriodicalId":50216,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.13754","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose/objectives: This prospective crossover preclinical trial aimed to evaluate the learning curve of dental students in successfully administering intraligamentary anesthesia (ILA) using three different syringe systems.
Methods: Dental students performed ILA using three devices in two separate sessions, each targeting mandibular and/or maxillary premolars. The devices included two manual systems (pistol-type and lever-based) and one computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD). The primary research parameter was the success rate of anesthesia, defined as the percentage of successful ILA administrations confirmed by a negative response to a cold test. Secondary parameters included pain experienced during needle penetration and injection, students' self-reported levels of mental tension and handling of the syringes, and any potential side effects.
Results: A total of 110 students performed ILA on 599 teeth during the study period. When comparing the CCLAD system to the manual syringes, the CCLAD system exhibited a significantly higher overall success rate in the first session (92.5% vs. 77.4%; p < 0.001), potentially due to its precise control of anesthetic flow and pressure, which likely facilitated more effective anesthetic delivery. However, when examining the individual manual techniques, no significant difference was found between the pistol-type manual and the CCLAD system (p = 0.66). All techniques' success rate increased from the first to the second session (80.4% vs. 86.9%; p = 0.0357). Additionally, penetration pain demonstrated a significant decrease across all techniques (p < 0.01). Notably, students' anxiety levels decreased, and self-assurance increased significantly over the sessions. Undesired reversible side effects were documented in 10.9% of cases.
Conclusion: These findings suggest that repeated practice of ILA, particularly with different syringe systems, enhances anesthetic success and psychological readiness for patient interaction. Additional training sessions may further improve proficiency.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Dental Education (JDE) is a peer-reviewed monthly journal that publishes a wide variety of educational and scientific research in dental, allied dental and advanced dental education. Published continuously by the American Dental Education Association since 1936 and internationally recognized as the premier journal for academic dentistry, the JDE publishes articles on such topics as curriculum reform, education research methods, innovative educational and assessment methodologies, faculty development, community-based dental education, student recruitment and admissions, professional and educational ethics, dental education around the world and systematic reviews of educational interest. The JDE is one of the top scholarly journals publishing the most important work in oral health education today; it celebrated its 80th anniversary in 2016.