Pain behaviour and distress in children during two sequential dental visits: comparing a computerised anaesthesia delivery system and a traditional syringe

Interventions to Reduce Intra-Operative and Post-Operative Pain Associated with Routine Dental Procedures in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

implementing appropriate pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to alleviate pain related to routine dental procedures in paediatric patients could enhance children's ability to manage dental care. The aim of this review was to investigate the effectiveness of and provide recommendations for interventions that can be used to reduce intra-operative and post-operative pain associated with routine paediatric dental procedures.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCT) was conducted. Multiple electronic databases were systematically searched. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. A meta-analysis was performed to determine the effectiveness of the interventions using the Cohen's d standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes. The GRADE tool was used to assess the certainty of evidence to make recommendations.

RESULTS

The review included forty-five RCTs comprising 3093 children. Thirty-seven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, which showed the effectiveness of behavioural interventions (SMD = -0.50, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.18), mechanoreceptor and thermal receptor stimulation (SMD = -1.38, 95% CI -2.02 to -0.73) for intra-operative pain, and pre-emptive oral analgesics (SMD = -0.77, 95% CI -1.21 to -0.33) for reducing post-operative pain in children receiving routine dental care.

CONCLUSION

The GRADE results for these interventions were strong recommendation (IB) for their use, based on moderate evidence and their benefits far outweighing the harm, and they can be delivered readily with minimal training to reduce the pain experience of paediatric patients.

Developmental Disturbance in Premolars After Intraligamental Anesthesia Using Computer-Controlled Local Anesthesia Delivery System: An-Eight-Years Follow-Up Study in Children

Aim This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of developmental disturbances in permanent second premolars in which their tooth buds were exposed to mandibular intraligamental anesthesia (ILA) using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD). Materials and methods This was a longitudinal follow-up study conducted in a previous randomized clinical trial (RCT). In the previous RCT, a total of 91 children were included (61 control and 30 cases). A structured form was created that contained details about the date of birth, age, and sex at which the participants received local anesthesia and the type of local anesthesia administered (ILA using CCLADS, traditional inferior alveolar nerve block [IANB], and IANB using CCLADS). A history of post-treatment abscess, retreatment, and post-treatment extraction was documented in both groups. Descriptive statistics, including frequency and percentage, and additionally, the chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare ILA and IANB. Results Forty of the 91 children attended follow-up visits. Only two children had developmental defects: one child who received traditional IANB had a demarcated white opacity (this patient had a history of dental abscess), and another who received ILA using CCLADS showed hypoplasia on his permanent premolar. No significant association was found between the type of anesthesia and the presence of developmental defects. Conclusion The slow administration of ILA delivered by CCLADS in the primary teeth does not increase the chances of developmental disturbances or damage to the corresponding permanent tooth bud.

Effectiveness of the "pain-free dental injection" (PaFein) teaching model in reducing children's pain: A randomized, controlled study

PURPOSE

This study explores the effectiveness of a comprehensive structured teaching model - the "PaFein" - for instructing postgraduate pediatric dental residents in the provision of pain-free local anesthesia to children.

METHODS

Ten postgraduate pediatric dental residents and 172 children between the ages 5 and 13 participated in the study following ethical approval. The previously measured baselines guided the randomization of study and control groups. The study group (five residents) attended the PaFein course (9 hours). Based on power calculations, residents performed dental injections (8 mandibular block, 8 palatal/lingual and 14 buccal infiltrations) in randomly assigned child patients. Demographic data of residents/children, parental and self-report anxiety scores and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores were noted to examine children's anxiety and pain during dental injections.

RESULTS

Children's mean anxiety score did not differ significantly between groups; however, VAS pain reports during dental injections (a, b, c, d) were found lower in the PaFein study group than the control group (p < 0.05). VAS pain reports for (a) buccal injections were 1.08 and 1.9 (p = 0.02); (b) inferior alveolar nerve blocks were 1.58 and 3.37 (p = 0.0002); (c) palatal/lingual injections were 1.34 and 3.02 (p < 0.0001); (d) total means were 1.28 and 2.59, respectively (p = 0.0001). VAS pain reports of anxious and non-anxious children in the PaFein study group (1.63 and 1.17) were also lower than the control group (3.33 and 2.39) (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The "PaFein" teaching model was found to be effective in training dental residents to reduce dental injection pain in children, including the anxious ones.

Comparison of the effectiveness of intraligamentary anesthesia and inferior alveolar nerve block on mandibular molar teeth in pediatric patients: a randomized controlled clinical study

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to compare the two local anesthetic techniques: inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) and intraligamentary anesthesia (ILA) during the restorative treatment of mandibular first permanent molars in pediatric patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized, controlled, cross-over, single-blind, split-mouth study, participants were divided into two groups: group 1, ILA in the first session and IANB in the second session, and group 2, IANB in the first session and ILA in the second session. The pain perception was analyzed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale (WBFPRS). Heart rate, arterial oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and postoperative complications were recorded. The data were analyzed with the Brunner-Langer model, Spearman correlation analysis, Fisher's exact t-test, chi-square, and McNemar tests.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients aged between 6 and 12 years were included. The session effect was not statistically significant in ILA (p = 0.762 and p = 0.411) for pain scores while it was significant in IANB (p < 0.001 for each score). There was no significant difference in the VAS, WBFPRS, heart rate, and SpO₂ between the anesthesia techniques (p = 0.454, p = 0.436, p = 0.406, p = 0.285, respectively). Postoperative complications increased in the IANB technique in the first session.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraligamentary anesthesia may be an alternative technique to IANB for the restorative treatment of mandibular first permanent molars in pediatric patients. In the first session, clinicians may choose the ILA instead of IANB.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In clinical procedures, administering anesthesia, which is effective, is less painful, and poses relatively low complication risk, has significant importance in sustaining children's cooperation with dental treatment.

Computer-controlled Intraligamentary local anaesthesia in extraction of mandibular primary molars: randomised controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Local anesthesia (LA) poses a threat in children more than the treatment process itself, so pediatric dentists are always demanding less painful techniques. Computer-controlled Intraligamentary anaesthesia (CC-ILA) is designed to reduce injection pain and side effects of conventional techniques. The present study aims to assess the pain experience using Computer-controlled Intraligamentary anaesthesia (CC-ILA) during injection and its effectiveness in controlling pain during extraction of mandibular primary molars in pediatric patients.

METHODS

This randomized controlled clinical trial includes 50 healthy cooperative children, aged 5-7 years with mandibular primary molars indicated for extraction. They were randomly allocated to two groups according to LA technique: test group received CC-ILA and control group received Inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB). Pain was measured during injection and extraction: physiologically using Heart rate (HR), subjectively using Face-Pain-Scale (FPS), and objectively using Sound-Eye-Motor scale (SEM). Patients were recalled after 24-h to record lip-biting events. Data was collected and statistically analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 50 children (29 females and 21 males) with mean age 6.10 ± 0.76 participated in the study. There were significantly lower scores in the heart rate in the CC-ILA group during injection (p = 0.04), but no significant difference was recorded between the two groups during extraction (p = 0.17). The SEM and FPS showed significant lower scores in the CC-ILA group during injection (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001) and extraction (p < 0.0001, p = 0.01) respectively. No children in CC-ILA group reported lip-biting after 24-h compared to 32% in IANB (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

CC-ILA provides significantly less painful injections than conventional techniques and has proved to be as effective as IANB during extraction of mandibular primary molars. An important advantage of this technique was the complete absence of any lip/cheek biting events. Trial registration The study was prospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier: NCT04739735 on 26th of January 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04739735 .

Comparative assessment of perceived pain in children during palatal anesthesia using two injection techniques: An In Vivo study

Background:

Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) is an approach that uses a constant and slow flow of delivering the anesthetic solution into the tissues, which is capable of alleviating pain and discomfort in children.

Aim:

Assessment of perceived pain in children during palatal anesthesia using Wand technique and conventional technique.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 30 children requiring bilateral palatal anesthesia were included in the study in a split-half design. The children were asked to indicate their intensity of pain response on a visual analog scale (VAS) after administration of anesthesia by the Wand technique and the conventional technique.

Statistical Analysis:

The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 16.0. Mann–Whitney U test compared the mean VAS scores between the two groups. Statistical significance was defined as a P value of less than 0.05.

Results:

The mean VAS scores using the Wand technique and the conventional technique were 3.87 ± 1.99 and 4.20 ± 1.44, respectively (P = 0.332). Females had lesser VAS scores compared to males (P = 0.008).

Conclusion:

Females readily accepted the Wand technique compared to males, although there was no substantial difference between the two injection procedures.

Pain Experienced during Various Dental Procedures: Clinical Trial Comparing the Use of Traditional Syringes with the Controlled-Flow Delivery Dentapen® Technique

Background and Objectives: Currently, one of the most discouraging aspects for many patients undergoing dental procedures is the administration of anaesthesia. Consequently, there is a constant search for new techniques to avoid the invasive and painful nature of the injection. A new motorised syringe system (Dentapen^®) has recently been developed, standing out for its convenience and ease of use. Material and Methods: Randomised, controlled, single-blind, and single-centre study including 178 voluntary adult participants aged between 18 and 90 years. Individuals were randomly assigned using a randomised table. Patients were asked to rate the level of pain experienced during the injections, using a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS). The following data were recorded: pain index, heart rate, blood pressure, and saturation, both before and after anaesthesia. Results: Of the total 178 participants, 87 participants (48.9%) were men and 91 (51.1%) were women. The first variable to be assessed was the pain experienced by patients when anaesthetised with a syringe, obtaining a mean value of 2.63 ± 1.86 on the VAS with the conventional syringe and 1.06 ± 1.28 with the Dentapen^® syringe, showing statistically significant differences (p-value < 0.01). When stratifying, based on the procedure that was undertaken, differences were also significant for all treatments (p-value < 0.01) except for endodontics, where differences were likely to be significant (p-value = 0.02). Conclusions: In conclusion, from a clinical standpoint, the Dentapen^® syringe is a valid alternative to traditional infiltration syringes, causing minimum pain with the injection.

Efficacy of external cold and a vibrating device in reducing pain and anxiety during local anaesthesia

Background and Aim:

To evaluate and compare the efficacy of external cold and a vibrating device in reducing the pain and anxiety amidst children receiving maxillary infiltration anaesthesia over conventional methods.

Method:

A sum of thirty subjects aged between 5 and 10 years who had undergone dental procedures requiring maxillary infiltration were enrolled in the current split-mouth randomised control study. The control intervention constitutes infiltration of 1.8 mL of 2% lignocaine in addition to 1:100,000 adrenaline (Lox, Neon Laboratories Mumbai, India) whereas, the experimental group used external cold and a vibrating device (Buzzy®, MMJ Labs, Atlanta, GA, USA) in annexation to the control protocol. Simultaneous to LA administration, pulse rate was employed as an objective measure and the subjective measure was recorded using RMS Pictorial Scale (RMS-PS) for the child’s discomfort. To document the child’s pain as anticipated by the dentist the revised face, limbs, arms, cry and consolability (FLACC-R) scale was employed.

Result:

Lower pain sensation and anxiety was recorded in the experimental group using Buzzy when compared to control.

Conclusion:

External cold in adjacent with vibrations might be efficient in lowering pain as well as anxiety in children experiencing infiltration dental anaesthesia though further research work is requisite with a larger sample size.

To Compare and Analyze the Potency of two Topical Anesthetic Gels in Reducing Inferior Alveolar Injection Pain in Children of 8-12 Years: A Double-Blinded Clinical Trial

Aim:

To compare and analyze the clinical adequacy of two topical anesthetic gels, Precaine (8% lidocaine + 0.8% dibucaine) and Precaine B (20% benzocaine) in children before intraoral local anesthetic injections.

Materials and Methods:

This clinical study included thirty children who needed an inferior alveolar nerve block. They were divided into three groups: Group A: Precaine topical gel group, Group B: Precaine B topical gel Group, Group C: no anesthetic topical gel group (control group). These two effective topical gels were applied before giving intraoral local anesthesia, and afterward, the child's pain response was surveyed utilizing the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale. The scores obtained were subjected to statistical analysis.

Results:

Intergroup comparison showed a significant mean difference between the control group and Precaine group (P > 0.05) as well as Precaine B group (P > 0.05). However, there is no significant difference obtained between Group A and Group B (P < 0.05).

Conclusion:

It is psychologically and clinically beneficial to apply a topical anesthetic agent before injecting any intraoral anesthesia. In this study, both anesthetic gels showed a nonsignificant difference in reducing inferior alveolar injection pain, but Precaine B shows more promising results than Precaine.

The influence of distinct techniques of local dental anesthesia in 9- to 12-year-old children: randomized clinical trial on pain and anxiety

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate pain, disruptive behavior, and anxiety in children undergoing different local dental anesthetic techniques.

METHODS

This randomized/parallel clinical trial analyzed three groups of patients (9-12 years old) (n = 35) who received infiltrative anesthesia using conventional (CA), vibrational (VBA), and computer-controlled techniques (CCLAD). The outcomes were pain self-perception (Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBF); Numerical Ranting Scale (NRS)), disruptive behavior (Face, Legg, Activity, Crying, Consolability Scale (FLACC)), anxiety (Corah's Dental Anxiety Scale; modified Venham Picture test (VPTm)), and physiological parameters (systolic (SBP)/diastolic pressure (DBP); heart rate (HR); oxygen saturation (SpO2); respiratory rate (RR)). Statistical analysis was accomplished using Kruskall-Wallis test and ANOVA for repeated measures (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Dental anxiety levels at the baseline were similar for all patients. CA promoted less pain than VBA in WBF (p = 0.018) and NRS (p = 0.006) and CCLAD in WBF (p = 0.029). There were no differences in disruptive behavior (FLACC p = 0.573), anxiety (VPTm p = 0.474), blood pressure (SBP p = 0.954; DBP p = 0.899), heart rate (p = 0.726), oxygen saturation (p = 0.477), and respiratory rate (p = 0.930) between anesthetic techniques.

CONCLUSION

Conventional technique resulted in less pain perception for dental local anesthesia.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Conventional technique reduces the self-reported pain in children 9-12 years old, and therefore, the use of additional devices or different anesthetic techniques is not justified.

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

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® (Rønvig 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 (α = 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 (p value = 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.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Computerized anesthesia devices are valid and more comfortable alternative to conventional anesthesia.

Evaluation of pain, disruptive behaviour and anxiety in children aging 5-8 years old undergoing different modalities of local anaesthetic injection for dental treatment: a randomised clinical trial

Objective: To evaluate the influence of different local anaesthetic techniques in pain, disruptive behaviour and anxiety in children´s dental treatment.Material and methods: This was a randomised and parallel clinical trial. The sample consisted of 105 children (5-8 years old) that were divided into three groups (n = 35) according to the anaesthetic technique: conventional anaesthesia (CA); vibrational anaesthesia (VBA); computer-controlled local anaesthesia delivery (CCLAD). The outcomes were self-perception of pain (Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale - WBF; Numerical Rating Scale - NRS); disruptive behaviour (Face, Legg, Activity, Cry, Consolability Scale - FLACC); anxiety (Corah's Dental Anxiety Scale; modified Venham Picture test - VPTm) and physiological parameters (blood pressure - systolic - SBP and diastolic - DBP; heart rate - HR; oxygen saturation - SpO2; respiratory rate - RR). Data were statistically analysed with Kruskall-Wallis test and ANOVA for repeated measures with Tukey post hoc test (α = 0.05).Results: All the patients exhibited the same level of dental anxiety at baseline (Corah's Dental Anxiety Scale). There was no difference in self-perception pain, irrespective the evaluation tool used (WBF - p = .864; VAS - p = .761). No differences were detected in disruptive behaviour (FLACC - p = .318); anxiety (VPTm - p = .274); blood pressure (SBP - p = .239; DBP - p = .512); heart rate (p = .728); oxygen saturation (p = .348) and respiratory rate (p = .238) between anaesthetic techniques.Conclusion: Different anaesthetic dental local techniques do not affect the levels of pain, disruptive behaviour, anxiety and physiological parameters in children aged 5-8 years old.

Influence of information concerning a computerized anesthesia system on dental anxiety: a randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

A single-blinded randomized controlled trial among patients requiring an upper third molar extraction was performed to evaluate the anxiety degree after receiving information or not about the functioning of The Wand system. Secondarily, perceived pain and the need of re-anesthesia were assessed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to the experimental group (detailed explanation about The Wand) or control group (no specific information). Local anesthesia with The Wand consisted in a supraperiosteal infiltrative technique injection 1.6 mL at the buccal and 0.2 mL at the palatal side. Distinct questionnaires for assessing dental anxiety and 100-mm visual analog scales to assess pain were delivered. Demographic data, radiological parameters, operative time and type of intervention were also registered. A descriptive bivariate analysis by non-parametric tests to detect differences in anxiety, pain and re-anesthesia was performed by SPSS 22.0 (SPPS Inc. Chicago, USA).

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were assessed for eligibility but 17 participants were lost due to the cancellation of the visit for the surgical intervention. Finally, sixty-eight patients were included (34 participants in each group), 47 women (69.1%) and 21 men (30.9%), with an average age of 28.8 (± 9.3) years.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients that received a detailed explanation of The Wand did not have a significant reduction of the anxiety degree and perceived pain during the anesthetic act compared to patients that received no information. The need of re-anesthesia was not related to the anxiety level but was significantly related to increasing operative time.

Does computerized anaesthesia reduce pain during local anaesthesia in paediatric patients for dental treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis analysed whether pain and disruptive behaviour can be decreased by the use of computerized local dental anaesthesia (CDLA) in children. The literature was screened to select randomized clinical trials that compared computerized and conventional anaesthesia. The primary outcome was pain perception during anaesthesia; the secondary, disruptive behaviour. The risk of bias of individual papers and the quality of the evidence were evaluated. After search, 8389 records were found and 20 studies remained for the qualitative and quantitative syntheses. High heterogeneity was detected for both outcomes. For the pain perception, the overall analysis showed a standard mean difference of -0.78 (-1.31, -0.25) favouring CDLA; however, when only studies at low risk of bias were analysed (subgroup analysis), there was no difference between the two techniques [-0.12(-0.46, 0.22)]. For disruptive behaviour, no differences were detected for continuous [-0.26 (-0.68, 0.16)] or dichotomous data [0.81 (0.62, 1.06)]. The quality of evidence was judged as low for pain perception and very low for disruptive behaviour. It is concluded that there is no difference in the pain perception and disruptive behaviour in children subjected to computerized or conventional dental local anaesthesia. Notwithstanding, the quality of the available evidence is low.

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment

BACKGROUND

Delivery of pain-free dentistry is crucial for reducing fear and anxiety, completion of treatment, and increasing acceptance of future dental treatment in children. Local anaesthetic (LA) facilitates this pain-free approach but it remains challenging. A number of interventions to help children cope with delivery of LA have been described, with no consensus on the best method to increase its acceptance.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of methods for acceptance of LA in children and adolescents during dental treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 24 May 2019); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019 Issue 4) in the Cochrane Library (searched 24 May 2019); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 24 of May 2019); Embase Ovid (1980 to 24 May 2019); and Web of Science (1900 to 24 May 2019). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also searched to 24 May 2019. There were no restrictions on language or date of publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions used to increase acceptance of dental LA in children and adolescents under the age of 18 years.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We performed data extraction and assessment of risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We contacted authors for missing information. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 trials with 2435 randomised participants aged between 2 and 16 years. Studies were carried out between 2002 and 2019 in dental clinics in the UK, USA, the Netherlands, Iran, India, France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Mexico, and Korea. Studies included equipment interventions (using several LA delivery devices for injection or audiovisual aids used immediately prior to or during LA delivery or both) and dentist interventions (psychological behaviour interventions delivered in advance of LA (video modelling), or immediately prior to or during delivery of LA or both (hypnosis, counter-stimulation). We judged one study to be at low risk and the rest at high risk of bias. Clinical heterogeneity of the included studies rendered it impossible to pool data into meta-analyses. None of the studies reported on our primary outcome of acceptance of LA. No studies reported on the following secondary outcomes: completion of dental treatment, successful LA/painless treatment, patient satisfaction, parent satisfaction, and adverse events. Audiovisual distraction compared to conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain for the outcome pain-related behaviour during delivery of LA with a reduction in negative behaviour when 3D video glasses where used in the audiovisual distraction group (risk ratio (RR) 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.50; 1 trial, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The wand versus conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain regarding the effect of the wand on pain-related behaviour during delivery of LA. Four studies reported a benefit in using the wand while the remaining studies results suggested no difference between the two methods of delivering LA (six trials, 704 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Counter-stimulation/distraction versus conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain for the outcome pain experience during delivery of LA with children experiencing less pain when counter-stimulation was used (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.34; 1 trial, 134 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Hypnosis versus conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain for the outcome pain experience during delivery of LA with participants in the hypnosis group experiencing less pain (mean difference (MD) -1.79, 95% CI -3.01 to -0.57; 1 trial, 29 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Other comparisons considered included pre-cooling of the injection site, the wand versus Sleeper One, the use of a camouflage syringe, use of an electrical counter-stimulation device, and video modelling acclimatisation, and had a single study each. The findings from these other comparisons were insufficient to draw any affirmative conclusions about their effectiveness, and were considered to be very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find sufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions as to the best interventions to increase acceptance of LA in children due to variation in methodology and nature/timing of outcome measures. We recommend further parallel RCTs, reported in line with the CONSORT Statement. Care should be taken when choosing outcome measures.

A Comparative Evaluation of Pain Perception and Comfort of a Patient Using Conventional Syringe and Buzzy System

Aim and objective

To evaluate the pain perception and comfort of patient during local anesthesia (LA) delivery using Buzzy system and conventional syringe.

Materials and methods

Fifty children aged 5 to 10 years were randomly divided into two groups, the main inclusion criteria being administration of LA for dental treatment. Parameters include Wong Baker face pain reading scale (WBFPRS) for subjective evaluation and pulse oximeter and face leg activity crying consolability (FLACC) scale for objective evaluation. The values obtained were statistically analyzed.

Results

FLACC score was higher in conventional group as compared to the Buzzy group, which was statistically significant.

Conclusion

External cold and vibration via Buzzy can reduce pain and anxiety during LA delivery.

How to cite this article

Suohu T, Sharma S, Marwah N, et al. A Comparative Evaluation of Pain Perception and Comfort of a Patient Using Conventional Syringe and Buzzy System. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(1):27–30.

Pain-related Disruptive Behavior during Dental Treatment Interpreted as Uncooperative Behavior-Small Case Series

Aim

To describe a small series of six cases of children who were diagnosed as uncooperative and referred to general anesthesia to complete their dental treatment. These children were actually exhibiting pain-related disruptive behaviors during previous dental treatments; we determined the reasons for ineffective anesthesia.

Background

One of the most common reasons for disruptive behaviors in children during operative dental treatment is the experiencing of pain during treatment. Disruptive behavior may lead to treatment under general anesthesia.

Case description

Parents of six uncooperative children referred to general anesthesia for dental treatment, arrived at our clinic, because they wanted a second opinion. The children were found to be nonresponsive to the common anesthetic technique and were treated by several approaches to increase the effectiveness of anesthesia. These included supplementary anesthesia to accessory innervation (in three cases), changing brands of anesthetic (in two cases), injecting the maximal dose at once to prevent tachyphylaxis, and waiting 5 minutes to achieve effectiveness of anesthesia (in one case). After achieving effective anesthesia, all the children fully cooperated during the operative treatment.

Conclusion

Ineffective anesthesia can lead to severe disruptive behavior when continuing the treatment irrespective to the sensation of pain. Several approaches were used to increase the effectiveness of anesthesia resulting in cooperation of the pediatric patients.

Clinical significance

Behavioral response to ineffective anesthesia may be diagnosed as uncooperativeness. Effort should be put to differentiate between ineffective anesthesia and uncooperative patient.

How to cite this article

Malka A, Maya G. Pain-related Disruptive Behavior during Dental Treatment Interpreted as Uncooperative Behavior—Small Case Series. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12(4):347–351.

Role of anxiety in young children's pain memory development after surgery

Pediatric pain is common, and memory for it may be distressing and have long-lasting effects. Children who develop more negatively biased memories for pain (ie, recalled pain is higher than initial pain report) are at risk of worse future pain outcomes. In adolescent samples, higher child and parent catastrophic thinking about pain was associated with negatively biased memories for postsurgical pain. This study examined the influence of child and parent anxiety on the development of younger children's postsurgical pain memories. Seventy-eight children undergoing a tonsillectomy and one of their parents participated. Parents reported on their anxiety (state and trait) before surgery, and trained researchers observationally coded children's anxiety at anaesthesia induction. Children reported on their postsurgical pain intensity and pain-related fear for 3 days after discharge. One month after surgery, children recalled their pain intensity and pain-related fear using the same scales previously administered. Results revealed that higher levels of postsurgical pain and higher parent trait anxiety predicted more negatively biased memories for pain-related fear. Parent state anxiety and child preoperative anxiety were not associated with children's recall. Children who developed negatively biased pain memories had worse postsurgical pain several days after surgery. These findings underscore the importance of reducing parental anxiety and effective postsurgical pain management to potentially buffer against the development of negatively biased pain memories in young children.

The influence of clinical and psychosocial characteristics on children behaviour during sequential dental visits: a longitudinal prospective assessment

PURPOSE

This is the first study to adopt a multilevel approach to assess the impact of the order of dental visits on child's behaviour. The aim was to investigate which factors directly interfere with child's behaviour regardless of the order of sequential dental visits.

METHODS

In this prospective longitudinal study, children aged 7-12 years were invited to participate. Child behaviour was assessed using the Frankl Scale during four sequential dental visits. Chi-square test was used to analyse the effect of dental fear on children's non-cooperative behaviour according to the presence of dental fear. Multilevel mixed logistic regression model was used to assess the association between predictor variables and the outcome (child behaviour) during the sequential dental visits.

RESULTS

Overall, 111 children participated in this study. Maternal dental anxiety, dental pain and complexity of the treatment were associated with the non-cooperative behaviour in children aged 7-12 years. When stratified by dental fear, the complexity of the treatment remained associated with non-cooperative behaviour.

CONCLUSIONS

The results provide evidence that, even with the familiarization of child with the dental environment, maternal dental anxiety, dental pain in the last month, and the complexity of dental treatment negatively affect the children's behaviour aged 7-12 years.

Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Injection Pain Using a Computer-Controlled Local Anesthetic Device (CCLAD): A Prospective, Randomized Study

There is evidence that the Computer-Controlled Local Anesthetic Device (CCLAD) decreases the pain of oral injections. The purpose of this study was to evaluate injection pain of the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) using the CCLAD in an upright position versus a supine position. Additionally, we evaluated solution deposition pain with the CCLAD when compared to previous studies using a traditional syringe. One hundred ten asymptomatic subjects were randomly given IANBs using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine while in an upright sitting position and supine position, at 2 different appointments, spaced at least 2 weeks apart. Each subject rated the pain for needle insertion, needle placement, and solution deposition on a Heft-Parker visual analogue scale. Pain ratings were compared between the upright and supine positions using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc testing using the Tukey-Kramer procedure. Moderate to severe pain was reported by 10% to 13% of the patients for needle insertion, 74% to 75% for full needle placement, and 8% to 10% for solution deposition. There was no significant difference between groups for phases of the injection. When comparing the injection phases within the groups, the needle placement phase of the injection was statistically more painful than both the needle insertion phase and solution deposition phase ( p = .0001). Using the CCLAD, IANB injection pain of the supine and upright positions was not statistically different. Needle placement was the most painful phase of the injection. Solution deposition pain was less with the CCLAD when compared to other studies of the IANB using a traditional syringe.

Behavior of Children toward Various Dental Procedures

Introduction

Dental treatment is known to trigger anxiety and fear even in fully grown adults, especially if administration of local anesthesia with a syringe is indicated. This study is aimed to evaluate whether procedures like an extraction and pulpectomy could trigger fear and anxiety in a pediatric patient and also the response of pediatric patients to other treatment modalities. Their perception toward receiving dental treatment as a whole is also evaluated. The effect of conditioning of the environment and the dentist (extractions done in second or third appointments) and its effect in decreasing the anxiety is also evaluated. The aim of the study is to evaluate the behavior of pediatric patients aged 7–17 years in response to various treatment procedures at Saveetha Dental College.

Materials and methods

The behavior of 50 children reporting to Saveetha Dental College, categorized according to the Frankl's behavior rating scale, was recorded before, during, and posttreatment.

Results

Children undergoing extractions and pulpectomies showed the most uncooperative behavior. Sixty percent of patients undergoing extraction and 45% of patients undergoing the pulp therapy showed negative behavior (rating 2) during treatment.

Conclusion

Invasive procedures like extractions and pulpectomies were procedures that brought out negative behavior in pediatric patients, especially during treatment.

How to cite this article

Sivakumar P, Gurunathan D. Behavior of Children toward Various Dental Procedures. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12(5):379–384.

Computerized intraligamental anesthesia in children: A review of clinical considerations

Pain control by means of local anesthesia is an intrinsic part of clinical practice in dentistry. Several studies evaluated intraligamental anesthesia using a computer-controlled anesthetic device in children. There is a need to provide a clinical guide for the use of computerized intraligamental anesthesia in children. Intraligamental anesthesia using a computer-controlled anesthetic device was found to cause significantly lower pain perception scores and lower pain-related behavior than traditional techniques. This device proven to be effective in restorative and pulp treatment in children; however, its effectiveness in primary teeth extraction is controversial. It is important to withdraw recommendations necessity of future studies concerning the side effects of computerized intraligamental anesthesia in children. The present study aims to review different clinical aspects of computerized intraligamental anesthesia in children along with the side-effects, type of local anesthesia and postoperative pain of this technique. This study provides dentists with a clinical guide for the use of computerized intraligamental anesthesia.

Barriers and Drawbacks of the Assessment of Dental Fear, Dental Anxiety and Dental Phobia in Children: A Critical Literature Review

OBJECTIVE

Dental anxiety, fear and phobia have different etiology, response patterns, time courses, and intensities that justify a clear distinction between these constructs. Differentiation of dental anxiety, fear or phobia in practice is a critical prerequisite for developing and implementing effective treatment for children. The aim of this study was to investigate whether current researches in the pediatric dentistry appropriately discriminate the central construct of dental anxiety, fear and phobia. We also highlighted the specific methodological issues in the assessment of these issues in pediatric dentistry.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic search was conducted in Pubmed/medline and Scopus for articles which assessed dental anxiety, fear or phobia in children.

RESULTS

104 research papers were included in the review that had made a distinction between dental anxiety, fear and phobia and had not used them interchangeably. Only five studies used different clinical measures or cut-offs to discriminate between dental anxiety, fear and phobia.

CONCLUSION

The dental literature appears unable to capture and also measure the multi-sided construct of dental anxiety, fear and phobia and, therefore, there was a tendency to use them interchangeably.

Pain Experience and Behavior Management in Pediatric Dentistry: A Comparison between Traditional Local Anesthesia and the Wand Computerized Delivery System

Aim. To evaluate the pain experience and behavior during dental injection, using the Wand computerized delivery system versus conventional local anesthesia in children and adolescents. Methods. An observational crossover split mouth study was performed on 67 patients (aged 7 to 15 years), requiring local anesthesia for dental treatments in both sides of the dental arch. Patients received both types of injections in two separate appointments, one with the use of a Computer Delivery System (the Wand STA system) and one with the traditional syringe. The following data were recorded: pain rating; changes in heart rate; level of collaboration; patient satisfaction. The data were analyzed using ANOVA for quantitative outcomes and nonparametric analysis (Kruskal–Wallis) for qualitative parameters. Results. The use of the Wand system determined significantly lower pain ratings and lower increase of heart rate than the traditional syringe. During injection, the number of patients showing a relaxed behavior was higher with the Wand than with the traditional local anesthesia. The patient level of satisfaction was higher with the Wand compared to the conventional local anesthesia. Conclusions. The Wand system may provide a less painful injection when compared to the conventional local anesthesia and it seemed to be better tolerated with respect to a traditional syringe.

Preoperative analgesics for additional pain relief in children and adolescents having dental treatment

BACKGROUND

Fear of dental pain is a major barrier to treatment for children who need dental care. The use of preoperative analgesics has the potential to reduce postoperative discomfort and intraoperative pain. We reviewed the available evidence to determine whether further research is warranted and to inform the development of prescribing guidelines. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of preoperative analgesics for intraoperative or postoperative pain relief (or both) in children and adolescents undergoing dental treatment without general anaesthesia or sedation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 5 January 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 12), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 5 January 2016), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 5 January 2016), LILACS via BIREME (1982 to 5 January 2016) and the ISI Web of Science (1945 to 5 January 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials to 5 January 2016. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication in the searches of the electronic databases. We handsearched several specialist journals dating from 2000 to 2011.We checked the reference lists of all eligible trials for additional studies. We contacted specialists in the field for any unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled clinical trials of analgesics given before dental treatment versus placebo or no analgesics in children and adolescents up to 17 years of age. We excluded children and adolescents having dental treatment under sedation (including nitrous oxide/oxygen) or general anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed titles and abstracts of the articles obtained from the searches for eligibility, undertook data extraction and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials in the review, with 190 participants in total. We did not identify any new studies for inclusion from the updated search in January 2016.Three trials were related to dental treatment, i.e. restorative and extraction treatments; two trials related to orthodontic treatment. We did not judge any of the included trials to be at low risk of bias.Three of the included trials compared paracetamol with placebo, only two of which provided data for analysis (presence or absence of parent-reported postoperative pain behaviour). Meta-analysis of the two trials gave arisk ratio (RR) for postoperative pain of 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 1.22; two trials, 100 participants; P = 0.31), which showed no evidence of a benefit in taking paracetamol preoperatively (52% reporting pain in the placebo group versus 42% in the paracetamol group). One of these trials was at unclear risk of bias, and the other was at high risk. The quality of the evidence is low. One study did not have any adverse events; the other two trials did not mention adverse events.Four of the included trials compared ibuprofen with placebo. Three of these trials provided useable data. One trial reported no statistical difference in postoperative pain experienced by the ibuprofen group and the control group for children undergoing dental treatment. We pooled the data from the other two trials, which included participants who were having orthodontic separator replacement without a general anaesthetic, to determine the effect of preoperative ibuprofen on the severity of postoperative pain. There was a statistically significant mean difference in severity of postoperative pain of -13.44 (95% CI -23.01 to -3.88; two trials, 85 participants; P = 0.006) on a visual analogue scale (0 to 100), which indicated a probable benefit for preoperative ibuprofen before this orthodontic procedure. However, both trials were at high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence is low. Only one of the trials reported adverse events (one participant from the ibuprofen group and one from the placebo group reporting a lip or cheek biting injury).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From the available evidence, we cannot determine whether or not preoperative analgesics are of benefit in paediatric dentistry for procedures under local anaesthetic. There is probably a benefit in using preoperative analgesics prior to orthodontic separator placement. The quality of the evidence is low. Further randomised clinical trials should be completed with appropriate sample sizes and well defined outcome measures.

Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery for painless anesthesia: a literature review

Local anesthesia is administered to reduce pain during dental treatments, but may itself cause pain and contribute to increased dental fear. Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) is one the method to reduce patient pain during local anesthesia; it is a device that slowly administers anesthetics by using a computerized device to control the injection speed. This literature review aims to provide an objective assessment of the usefulness of CCLAD for controlling pain by reviewing papers published to date that have used CCLAD.

Cartridge syringe vs computer controlled local anesthetic delivery system: Pain related behaviour over two sequential visits - a randomized controlled trial

Background

Local anesthetic injection is one of the most anxiety provoking procedure in dentistry. Knowledge about change in pain related behaviour during consecutive visits helps in and scheduling of treatment procedures and management of children in dental clinic.

Aim

To compare the pain perception, behavioural response and the associated change in physiological parameters while receiving local anesthesia injection with cartridge syringe and computer controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD) over two consecutive visits.

Material and Methods

In this randomized controlled cross over trial, 120 children aged 7 – 11 years were randomly divided into group A: receiving injections with CCLAD during first visit; group B: receiving injections with cartridge syringe during first visit. The physiological parameters (heart rate and blood pressure) were recorded before and during injection procedure. Objective evaluation of disruptive behaviour and subjective evaluation of pain perceived were done using Face Legs Activity Cry Consolability (FLACC) scale and modified facial image scale (FIS) respectively.

Results

No statistical difference in pain response (p= 0.164) and disruptive behaviour (p = 0.120) between cartridge syringe and CCLAD injections were seen during the first visit although the latter showed lesser scores. However, during the second visit there were significant increase in pain response (p = 0.004) and disruptive behaviour (p = 0.006) in cartridge syringe group with an associated increase in heart rate.

Conclusions

Injections with CCLAD produced lesser pain ratings and disruptive behaviour than cartridge syringe in children irrespective of order of visit.

Key words:Behaviour, cartridge syringe, CCLAD, local anesthesia.

Evaluation of the clinical success of class I cavities prepared by an Er:YAG laser-5-year follow-up study

The purpose of this study was to evaluate, after 5 years, the clinical success of preparing class 1 composite resin restorations with an Er:YAG laser. Sixty-five teeth of 30 patients were included in the study, and an Er:YAG laser emitting at a wavelength of 2.94 μm was used for the class I cavity preparations with not more than one third of the mesiodistal width of the occlusal surfaces of each tooth. All cavities were restored with a light-cured composite resin, following a single bond application. After the baseline examination, restorations were reevaluated by the same experienced clinician after 5 years, using the modified Ryge criteria. At the end of 5 years, 41 of the 65 restorations were evaluated in 22 patients and scored. With respect to marginal discoloration, anatomic form, color match, and surface texture, significant differences were found between baselines tested after 5 years. Clinical evaluation of postoperative sensitivity showed that 90.2 % were rated as alpha. All restorations evaluated in this study demonstrated acceptable clinical performance within the evaluation period based on the alpha and bravo ratings for clinically satisfactory restorations. Further evaluations are necessary for a better clinical performance analysis.

Intraoperative local anaesthesia for reduction of postoperative pain following general anaesthesia for dental treatment in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Whilst carrying out dental procedures under general anaesthesia (GA), practitioners routinely give local anaesthetics (LA) intraoperatively to children. Local anaesthetics are used to help manage postoperative pain and reduce bleeding and the physiological response to procedures. Studies of effectiveness of intraoperative LA to date have reported contradictory results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of intraoperative local anaesthesia for reducing postoperative pain following general anaesthesia for dental treatment in children and young people aged 17 years or younger.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2013, Issue 12), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 02 January 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 02 January 2014) and Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 02 January 2014). We searched for ongoing trials in the US National Institutes of Health Register, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) Clinical Trials Portal. We did not place any restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in which local anaesthetic was given intraoperatively under general anaesthesia for dental treatment of children and young people aged 17 years or younger.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We performed data extraction and assessment of risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We contacted authors to clarify omissions in trial reports. In the 'Summary of findings' tables, we elected to report the outcomes pain, distress, postoperative bleeding, and physiological parameters related to the general anaesthetic, as we considered these to be the outcomes of greatest importance to readers of the review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 trials in this review, with 1152 randomised participants. The studies were published between 1990 and 2009 and were conducted in the United Kingdom, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. The age of participants ranged from 2 to 40 years. Three studies were at an overall high risk of bias, seven studies were at an unclear risk of bias, and we judged four studies to be at low risk of bias. The clinical heterogeneity of the included studies precluded pooling of studies in terms of method of administration of LA (e.g., intraligamental injection, infiltration injection, or topical delivery) and variation in the use of supplementary analgesics and follow-up time.Of the seven studies where administration of LA was by infiltration injection, six studies (very low-quality body of evidence, 542 participants analysed, 1 study had overall high risk of bias, 4 studies had overall unclear risk of bias, 1 study had overall low risk of bias) measured postoperative pain. The results were equivocal. There was a decrease in bleeding and increase in soft tissue damage in the LA groups, but we did not judge this to be clinically significant.In the 2 studies where administration of LA was by intraligamental injection, there was no difference in mean pain scores, and they did not report any soft tissue damage (very low-quality body of evidence, 115 participants analysed, 1 study had overall high risk of bias, 1 study had overall unclear risk of bias).One 3-armed study (very low-quality body of evidence, 54 participants analysed, overall high risk of bias) compared the effects of intraligamental and infiltration LA injection with no treatment. There was no evidence of a mean difference in pain, distress, or postoperative anxiety among the three groups.Four studies (very low-quality body of evidence, 343 participants analysed, 2 studies had overall low risk of bias, 2 studies had overall unclear risk of bias) evaluated the effects of topical LA compared with no treatment or placebo. One study (overall unclear risk of bias) with a no-treatment comparator reported lower mean pain in the LA group; all other studies reported no difference in mean pain scores. Two studies reported on bleeding (overall unclear risk of bias): One study reported a clinically insignificant increase in bleeding with no treatment; the other reported no difference.None of the studies reported on participant or child satisfaction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this review, it was difficult to reach firm conclusions as to the benefit of using local anaesthetic for dental treatment under general anaesthesia. The information reported in the included studies was comprehensive and applicable to the review question, but ultimately it was not sufficient to address the objective of the review. We were unable to pool the included studies in a meta-analysis because of substantial variation in outcome measures, interventions, and treatment types. The use of supplementary analgesia further obscured the effect of local anaesthetics.Based on the literature review and the results of this review, we recommend further randomised controlled trials that minimise bias through adequate allocation concealment and blinding of participants and assessors, and assess the effect of intraoperative local anaesthetic on the volume and type of anaesthetic used and on the cardiovascular system in participants receiving supplementary analgesics as well. Researchers should give consideration to the impact of any changes on the health and well-being of the participant and report baseline measures of pain or distress, or both, and preoperative anxiety.

Comparing the onset of maxillary infiltration local anaesthesia and pain experience using the conventional technique vs. the Wand in children

AIM

This prospective, randomised, parallel, controlled study was conducted firstly to compare the onset of local anaesthesia (LA) when using the conventional technique versus the Wand computer-controlled LA and secondly to assess the pain experience in children.

METHOD

Thirty children were randomly allocated to the treatment group (Wand) or the control group (conventional). Lidocaine 2% with adrenaline (1:80,000) was given as a buccal infiltration. The onset of pulpal anaesthesia was tested using an analytic electric pulp tester (EPT). The pain experience during the LA was recorded using a modified visual analogue score (VAS).

RESULTS

Median time for the onset of LA was 6.30 minutes for the control and 7.25 minutes for the Wand group. Mean pain experience score for the control group was 9.78% as opposed to 8.46% in the Wand group. Statistical analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the onset of LA (p = 0.486) and the pain experience (p = 0.713) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

When placing a buccal infiltration on upper first permanent molars, the onset of LA and the pain experience was no different using the Wand and the conventional technique.

Supplemental pulpal anesthesia for mandibular teeth

Clinical pulpal anesthesia is dependent on the interaction of three major factors. (1) the dentist (2) the patient and (3) local anesthesia. Many patients fear endodontic treatment due to a concern about pain. Although pain treatment is well managed in many endodontic patients, there exists a group of patients who do not receive adequate local anesthesia. The purpose of this review article is to discuss the possible reasons for pulpal anesthetic failures and also to focus on the measures for developing effective approaches for the same.

Pain-related behaviour in children: a randomised study during two sequential dental visits

AIM

To determine the difference in pain- and distress-related behaviour in children between two consecutive dental treatment sessions using a computer-controlled local anaesthetic delivery system, with dental anxiety as co-variable.

METHODS

A randomised prospective study over two sequential visits in three paediatric dental practices. For both visits 112 young, healthy children needing dental treatment were randomly assigned to either the use of the Wand(®) or the Sleeper One(®). All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 17. A significance level of p < 0.01 was used, correcting for conducting a high number of tests.

RESULTS

Children showed significantly more muscle tension, more verbal protest, and more crying or screaming during the second treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential dental treatments seem to have a conditioning effect. It is important to know the level of dental anxiety to adjust the treatment sequence to the needs of the child.

Preoperative analgesics for additional pain relief in children and adolescents having dental treatment

BACKGROUND

Fear of dental pain is a major barrier to children needing dental care. The use of preoperative analgesics has the potential to reduce postoperative discomfort. In addition it might also reduce intraoperative pain. Reviewing the available evidence will determine whether further research is warranted and will inform the development of prescribing guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of preoperative analgesics for pain relief in children and adolescents undergoing dental treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 8 March 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 8 March 2012), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 8 March 2012), LILACS via BIREME (1982 to 8 March 2012) and the ISI Web of Knowledge (1945 to 8 March 2012). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication.The reference lists of all eligible trials were checked for additional studies. Specialists in the field were contacted for any unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled clinical trials of analgesics given before dental treatment versus placebo or no analgesics in children and adolescents aged up to 17 years. We excluded children and adolescents having dental treatment under sedation (including nitrous oxide/oxygen) or general anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed titles and abstracts for eligibility and undertook data extraction and assessment of risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Five trials met the review's inclusion criteria with 190 participants in total. Three trials were dentally related i.e. restorative and extraction treatments; two trials related to orthodontic treatment. None of the included trials were judged to be at low risk of bias. Three trials compared paracetamol with placebo, only two of which provided data for analysis (presence or absence of parent-reported postoperative pain behaviour). The meta-analysis of the two trials showed a nonsignificant risk ratio (RR) for postoperative pain-related behaviours of 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 1.22; P = 0.31), which showed no evidence of a benefit in taking paracetamol preoperatively (52% reporting pain in placebo versus 42% in test group). One of these trials was at unclear risk of bias, the other at high risk. Four trials compared ibuprofen with placebo. Three of these trials provided useable data. One trial reported no statistical difference in postoperative pain experienced by the ibuprofen group and the control group for children undergoing dental treatment. Data from two trials, including patients who were having orthodontic separator replacement without a general anaesthetic, were pooled to determine the effect of preoperative ibuprofen on the severity of postoperative pain. There was a statistically significant benefit, with regard to severity of postoperative pain, for giving ibuprofen preoperatively with mean difference -19.12 (95% CI -29.36 to -8.87; P = 0.0003; moderate quality evidence) on a visual analogue scale (0 to 100) indicating a probable benefit for preoperative ibuprofen before this orthodontic procedure. However, both these trials were at high risk of bias. Adverse events were only reported in one trial (one patient from the ibuprofen group and one from the placebo group reporting a lip or cheek biting injury).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From the available evidence we cannot determine whether or not preoperative analgesics are of benefit in paediatric dentistry for procedures under local anaesthetic. There is probably a benefit in prescribing preoperative analgesics prior to orthodontic separator placement.

Advanced techniques and armamentarium for dental local anesthesia

Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (C-CLAD) devices and systems for intraosseous (IO) injection are important additions to the dental anesthesia armamentarium. C-CLAD using slow infusion rates can significantly reduce the discomfort of local anesthetic infusion, especially in palatal tissues, and facilitate palatal approaches to pulpal nerve block that find special use in cosmetic dentistry, periodontal therapy, and pediatric dentistry. Anesthesia of single teeth can be obtained using either C-CLAD intraligamentary injections or IO injections. Supplementary IO anesthesia is particularly suited for providing effective pain control of teeth diagnosed with irreversible pulpitis.

Pain and fear in connection to orthodontic extractions of deciduous canines

BACKGROUND

Interceptive extractions of deciduous canines are, from a patient perspective, poorly investigated.

AIMS

To describe pain, discomfort, and dental fear in connection to extractions of the deciduous canines, indicated as an orthodontic treatment procedure.

DESIGN

Thirty-two Swedish children aged 7-9 years had all four deciduous canines extracted over three occasions. The children rated procedural and postoperative pain on visual analogue scales. Acceptance of injections and extractions was assessed by the treating dentists. Analgesic consumption and recovery time for drinking and eating was reported by parents. Dental fear was assessed using the Children's Fear Survey Schedule questionnaire.

RESULTS

Procedural pain showed low median levels, although some individuals reported high values. Boys reported significantly more pain at appointments when two (as opposed to one) canines were extracted. Postoperative pain levels were low and use of analgesics sparse. Dental fear paralleled norm values and did not increase from pre- to post-extraction.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain management routines during extractions of this kind should be revised. Single tooth extractions seem to be preferable to extractions of two canines at the same appointment. Extraction of four deciduous canines should not cause major postoperative inconvenience; these extractions neither triggered nor increased dental fear.

A comparison of pain and anxiety associated with the administration of maxillary local analgesia with Wand and conventional technique

AIM

This was to compare the sensation of pain when injections were given using the Wand computer controlled local analgesia (LA) system and a conventional technique in children of pre-school and school age.

METHODS

38 children were randomly assigned to either a treatment or control group. The treatment (Wand) group consisted of 20 children, while the control group (conventional LA technique) consisted of 18 children. The children were aged between 39.0 and 120.0 months with a mean age of 81.9 months (SD- 23.2). One operator carried out all local analgesia administrations. Pain sensation was rated using the VAS scale by the operator, each child and their parent. Anxiety was rated using the Venham scale.

RESULTS

No statistical difference in pain sensation and anxiety was found when the Wand was used, compared with the conventional technique (P=0.710, P=0.976). The results also showed no significant difference in anxiety change between males and females in the two groups (P=0.714).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in the pain or anxiety experienced by the children in the conventional and Wand group.

Pain assessment by children and adolescents during intraosseous anaesthesia using a computerized system (QuickSleeper)

BACKGROUND

Intraosseous (IO) anaesthesia has been shown to be effective in children. However, the pain associated with anaesthetic injections, and its acceptance by children, have never been studied.

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the pain associated with the IO injection of 4% articaine with 1 : 200 000 epinephrine using the computerized QuickSleeper' system in a population of children and adolescents.

DESIGN

IO anaesthesia was performed on patients aged 10.4 +/- 2.6 years of age. The patients assessed their pain on a faces pain scale (FPS) and on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The operators were also asked to assess signs of patient pain/discomfort.

RESULTS

No pain or mild discomfort was reported by, respectively, 81.8% (FPS) and 83.9% (VAS) of the patients. Some 58.9% of children with previous experience of dental anaesthesia reported that computerized IO anaesthesia was more comfortable than traditional infiltration methods. Operators noted signs of discomfort during penetration and injection in 18.3% and 25.3% of the patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the majority of children reported no pain or mild pain when anaesthetic was administered by computerized needle rotation and solution deposition. This technique holds promise for use by trained paediatric dentists.