Drugs for pain management in dentistry

Conventional medical attitudes to using a traditional medicine vodou-based model of pain management: survey of French dentists and the proposal of a pain model to facilitate integration

OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this study were to develop a pain management model using traditional medicine (TM) vodou healing methods; to survey a sample of French dentists to rate components of conventional and proposed TM vodou-based pain management model; and to assess the possibility of conventional, allopathic providers to integrate TM or complementary and alternative medicine concepts.

METHODS

From a set of 30 fact sheets collected from TM African healers (vodou healers), main clinical concepts and terminology were extracted. Twenty vodou-based pain management concepts were collected from an interview with a TM vodou practitioner. From this information, a 7-step vodou-based pain management model was created. A sample of 40 French dentists from Nantes, France, whose practices focused on the clinical treatment of dental pain, was surveyed to assess the importance of both TM (vodou) and conventional biomedical components.

RESULTS

Seventy percent of the dentists sampled rated the rational components of the TM model as "very important" or "important" for pain treatment, whereas 2 other traditional concepts were considered to be "supernatural" or beyond understanding.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that traditional healers used conventional concepts and conventional practitioners could use traditional concepts. This suggests that conventional allopathic medical providers have the capacity to integrate biomedical concepts and other therapeutic and explanatory models. This information may be helpful to understand and improve risk management by anticipating and preventing potential reasons for failure in TM integration strategies and to enhance communication between patients, healers, and physicians to optimize TM or complementary and alternative medicine integration.

Laboratory monitoring of patients treated with antihypertensive drugs and newly exposed to non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: a cohort study

Background

Drug-Drug Interactions between Non Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) and Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs), Angiotensin Receptor Blocker (ARBs) or diuretics can lead to renal failure and hyperkalemia. Thus, monitoring of serum creatinine and potassium is recommended when a first dispensing of NSAID occur in patients treated with these drugs.

Methods

We conducted a pharmacoepidemiological retrospective cohort study using data from the French Health Insurance Reimbursement Database to evaluate the proportion of serum creatinine and potassium laboratory monitoring in patients treated with ACEI, ARB or diuretic and receiving a first dispensing of NSAID. We described the first dispensing of NSAID among 3,500 patients of a 4-year cohort (6,633 patients treated with antihypertensive drugs) and analyzed serum creatinine and potassium laboratory monitoring within the 3 weeks after the first NSAID dispensing.

Results

General Practitioners were the most frequent prescribers of NSAIDs (85.5%, 95% CI: 84.3–86.6). The more commonly prescribed NSAIDs were ibuprofen (20%), ketoprofen (15%), diclofenac (15%) and piroxicam (12%). Serum creatinine and potassium monitoring was 10.7% (95% CI: 9.5–11.8) in patients treated by ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics. Overall, monitoring was more frequently performed to women aged over 60, treated with digoxin or glucose lowering drugs, but not to patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics. Monitoring was more frequent when NSAIDs' prescribers were cardiologists or anesthesiologists.

Conclusion

Monitoring of serum creatinine and potassium of patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics and receiving a first NSAID dispensing is insufficiently performed and needs to be reinforced through specific interventions.

Sublingual ketorolac and sublingual piroxicam are equally effective for postoperative pain, trismus, and swelling management in lower third molar removal

OBJECTIVE

Lower third molar removal provides a clinical model for studying analgesic drugs. The present study's aim was to compare the clinical efficacy of sublingual ketorolac and sublingual piroxicam in managing pain, trismus and swelling after lower third molar extraction in adult volunteers.

STUDY DESIGN

In this double-blinded, randomized, crossover investigation, 47 volunteers received for 4 days ketorolac sublingually (10 mg 4 times daily) and piroxicam sublingually (20 mg once daily) during 2 separate appointments after lower third molar extraction of symmetrically positioned lower third molars. A surgeon evaluated objective parameters (surgery duration, mouth opening, rescue analgesic medication, and facial swelling) and volunteers documented subjective parameters (postoperative pain and global evaluation), comparing postoperative results for a total of 7 days after surgery. The means of the objective and subjective parameters were compared for statistical significance (P < .05).

RESULTS

Volunteers reported low pain scores during the postoperative period when treated with either sublingual ketorolac or piroxicam. Also, volunteers ingested similar amounts of analgesic rescue medication (paracetamol) when they received either drug sublingually (P > .05). Additionally, values for mouth openings measured just before surgery and immediately after suture removal 7 days later were similar among volunteers (P > .05), and the type of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) used in this study showed no significant differences between swellings on the second or seventh days after surgery (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Pain, trismus, and swelling after lower third molar extraction, independent of surgical difficulty, were successfully controlled by sublingual ketorolac (10 mg 4 times daily) or sublingual piroxicam (20 mg once daily), and no significant differences were observed between the NSAIDs evaluated.

Misuse of acetaminophen in the management of dental pain

PURPOSE

We highlight the risk associated with acetaminophen misuse in patients having dental pain in France based on a series of cases of unintentional acetaminophen overdose reported by the Emergency Dental Service of Nancy over a 9-month period.

METHODS

Data were collected by querying the French Pharmacovigilance database. Each retrieved clinical data were reviewed by a clinician.

RESULTS

Thirteen cases of acetaminophen overdose were reported to the Regional Pharmacovigilance Center of Lorraine, Nancy, France. Most cases (10/13) concerned men aged 20-40 years old. Mild, unspecific clinical symptoms were observed in seven of 13 patients. The median value of the supposed ingested dose was 137 mg/kg/24 h. Liver enzyme activity was tested in 10 patients and was abnormal in four patients. N-acetylcysteine treatment was administered to four patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose that even patients with mild clinical symptoms with a supposed ingested dose of acetaminophen greater than 150 mg/kg/24 h should be referred to an emergency department and that liver enzyme activity should be analyzed. No case of liver failure was observed during our short survey. However, hepatotoxicity of repeated supratherapeutic ingestion of acetaminophen was suspected in four patients. Patients and practitioners should thus be better informed about the risk of unintentional acetaminophen overdose following supratherapeutic acetaminophen ingestion.

A randomised, five-parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and tolerability of analgesic combinations including a novel single-tablet combination of ibuprofen/paracetamol for postoperative dental pain

Combination analgesia is often recommended for the relief of severe pain. This was a double-blind, 5-arm, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, randomised, single-dose study designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a novel single-tablet combination of ibuprofen and paracetamol with that of an ibuprofen/codeine combination, and a paracetamol/codeine combination, using the dental impaction pain model. Subjects with at least 3 impacted third molars and experiencing moderate to severe postoperative pain were randomised to receive: 1 or 2 tablets of a single-tablet combination of ibuprofen 200mg/paracetamol 500mg; 2 tablets of ibuprofen 200 mg/codeine 12.8mg; 2 tablets of paracetamol 500mg/codeine 15mg; or placebo. Results for the primary endpoint, the sum of the mean scores of pain relief combined with pain intensity differences over 12hours, demonstrated that 1 and 2 tablets of the single-tablet combination of ibuprofen/paracetamol were statistically significantly more efficacious than 2 tablets of placebo (P<0.0001) and paracetamol/codeine (P⩽0.0001); furthermore, 2 tablets offered significantly superior pain relief to ibuprofen/codeine (P=0.0001), and 1 tablet was found noninferior to this combination. Adverse events were uncommon during this study and treatment emergent adverse events were statistically significantly less frequent in the groups taking the ibuprofen/paracetamol combination compared with codeine combinations. In conclusion, 1 or 2 tablets of a single-tablet combination of ibuprofen 200mg/paracetamol 500mg provided highly effective analgesia that was comparable with, or superior to, other combination analgesics currently indicated for strong pain. A single-tablet combination of ibuprofen 200mg/paracetamol 500mg provides highly effective analgesia, comparable or superior to other combination analgesics indicated for strong pain.

Comparison of oral versus sublingual piroxicam during postoperative pain management after lower third molar extraction

In this study, 53 patients received piroxicam, administered orally or sublingually, after undergoing removal of symmetrically positioned lower third molars, during two separate appointments. This study used a randomized, blind, cross-over protocol. Objective and subjective parameters were recorded for comparison of postoperative results for 7 days after surgery. Patients treated with oral or sublingual piroxicam reported low postoperative pain scores. The patients who received piroxicam orally took a similar average amount of analgesic rescue medication compared with patients who received piroxicam sublingually (p>0.05). Patients exhibited similar values for mouth opening measured just before surgery and immediately following suture removal 7 days later (p>0.05), and showed no significant differences between routes of piroxicam administration for swelling control during the second or seventh postoperative days (p>0.05). In summary, pain, trismus and swelling after lower third molar extraction, independent of surgical difficulty, could be controlled by piroxicam 20mg administered orally or sublingually and no significant differences were observed between the route of delivery used in this study.