Treatment of intra-oral injection phobia: a randomized delayed intervention controlled trial among Norwegian 10- to 16-year-olds

Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Children and Adolescents With Dental or Injection Phobia: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Dental phobia (DP) and injection phobia (IP) are common in children and adolescents and are considered some of the biggest obstacles to successful treatment in pediatric dentistry. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment for anxiety and phobias. As the availability of CBT in dentistry is low, internet-based CBT (ICBT) was developed. Open trials have shown that ICBT is a promising intervention, but randomized trials are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This randomized controlled trial tests whether therapist-guided ICBT supported by a parent could reduce fear, allowing children and adolescents with DP or IP to receive dental treatment.

METHODS

We enrolled 33 participants (mean age 11.2, SD 1.9 y) whom a clinical psychologist had diagnosed with DP, IP, or both. After inclusion, participants were randomized to either ICBT (17/33, 52%) or a control group of children on a waitlist (16/33, 48%). ICBT was based on exposure therapy and comprised a 12-week at-home program combined with visits to their regular dental clinic. Participants corresponded weekly with their therapist after completing each module, and 1 parent was designated as a coach to support the child in the assignments during treatment. All participants completed measurements of the outcome variables before treatment start and after 12 weeks (at treatment completion). The measurements included a structured diagnostic interview with a clinical psychologist. Our primary outcome measure was the Picture-Guided Behavioral Avoidance Test (PG-BAT), which assesses the ability to approach 17 dental clinical procedures, and a positive clinical diagnosis. Secondary outcome measures included self-report questionnaires that measured self-efficacy and levels of dental and injection anxiety. The children and their parents completed the questionnaires.

RESULTS

All participants underwent the 12-week follow-up. After treatment, 41% (7/17) of the participants in the ICBT group no longer met the diagnostic criteria for DP or IP, whereas all participants in the control group did (P=.004). Repeated-measure ANOVAs showed that ICBT led to greater improvements on the PG-BAT compared with the control group; between-group effect sizes for the Cohen d were 1.6 (P<.001) for the child-rated PG-BAT and 1.0 (P=.009) for the parent-rated PG-BAT. Reductions in our secondary outcomes-dental fear and anxiety (P<.001), negative cognitions (P=.001), and injection fear (P=.011)-as well as improvements in self-efficacy (P<.001), were all significantly greater among children in the ICBT group than in the controls. No participants reported adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

ICBT seems to be an effective treatment for DP and IP in children and adolescents. It reduced fear and anxiety and enabled participants to willingly receive dental treatment. ICBT should be seriously considered in clinical practice to increase accessibility; this therapy may reduce the need for sedation and restraint and lead to better dental health in children and adolescents.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02588079; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02588079.

Prevalence and stability of blood-injection-injury phobia in childhood-A prospective community study in Norway

AIM

An individual with a blood-injection-injury (BII) phobia often avoids exposure to triggers, such as blood tests and clinic appointments, leading to potentially serious health complications. This population-based study examined the prevalence, stability and course of BII phobia in children and adolescents.

METHODS

The data came from the Trondheim Early Secure Study, conducted from 2007 to 2018. All children born in Trondheim, Norway, in 2003 and 2004 were invited to attend. Clinical interviews were conducted by trained personnel to assess BII phobia in 1042 children (51% female) every 2 years from 4 to 14 years of age. Latent growth curves and logistic regression analyses were used in the data analysis.

RESULTS

Just under 20% of the cohort experienced a BII phobia at least once, with no significant sex differences. The prevalence of BII phobias increased from 3% at 4 years of age and peaked at about 8% at 10 years of age, before levelling off. The two-year stability increased as 12-14 years of age approached.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of BII was affected by age, but not sex. Early BII phobias often recede with time, but children may need treatment if they persist from 8 years of age.

Held still or pressured to receive dental treatment: self-reported histories of children and adolescents treated by non-specialist dentists in Hordaland, Norway

Aim

This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of a self-reported history of restraint in children and adolescents when receiving dental care by non-specialist dentists and to assess differences in dental fear and anxiety (DFA), intra-oral injection fear, and trust in dentists between patients with and without a self-reported history of restraint.

Methods

An electronic cross-sectional survey was distributed to all 9 years old (n = 6686) and 17 years old (n = 6327) in the Public Dental Service in Hordaland County, Norway, in 2019. For statistical evaluation, we generated descriptive statistics and Mann–Whitney U tests.

Results

The response rate ranged between 43.5 and 59.9% for the different questions. The prevalence of a self-reported history of being held still against one’s will during dental treatment and pressured to undergo dental treatment against one’s will was 3.6% and 5.1%, respectively. In general, these patients reported higher DFA, and higher intra-oral injection fear compared with those without such histories of restraint. Patients who had reported being held still against their will during dental treatment had significantly higher distrust in dentists than those who did not report restraint (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

To feel pressured to receive dental treatment and to be held still against one’s will overlap with the concepts of psychological and physical restraint. Patients with a self-reported history of restraint recorded significant differences in DFA, intra-oral injection fear, and trust in dentists compared to those who did not report restraint. Future studies should explore the role that restraint may play in relation to a patient’s DFA, intra-oral injection fear, and trust in dentists.

10-year follow-up study on attendance pattern after dental treatment in primary oral health care clinic for fearful patients

Background

Dental fear may lead to avoidance of regular dental treatment. The scope of this long-term practe-based study was to monitor the dental attendance of patients who received chair-side dental and fear treatment.

Methods

In 2000–2006, patients in the City of Oulu, Finland, received treatment for dental fear in the Clinic for Fearful Dental Patients (CFDP) from primary health care dentists trained on this subject. Of the originally treated patients (n = 163), 152 (93%) with sufficient information in dental records made up the study population. Information on their age and sex was available. The number of dental examinations, emergency visits and missed appointments was collected covering the follow-up period of 10 years 2006–2016. For analyses, data were dichotomized according to age at baseline and preliminary outcome baseline condition of dental fear treatment evaluated in 2006. To investigate association further, Poisson regression as well as binary logistic regression models were conducted. As register keeper, the City of Oulu gave permission for this retrospective data-based study.

Results

Patients receiving dental fear treatment at younger age (2–10 y) had significantly more dental examinations than those treated at > 10 years. Preliminary success was associated with the number of examinations, but not with emergency visits and missed appointments. Sex was not a significant factor in later dental attendance. There was an association between few dental examinations and dental emergency care need with unsuccessful baseline outcome of dental fear treatment.

Conclusions

Successful dental fear treatment especially at an early age is beneficial for future dental attendance measured by the number of examinations and consequently, less need for emergency care than in the opposite case. Successful fear treatment has positive impact on later dental care and regular dental attendance.

Cognitive behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Previous Cochrane Reviews have shown that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is effective in treating childhood anxiety disorders. However, questions remain regarding the following: up-to-date evidence of the relative efficacy and acceptability of CBT compared to waiting lists/no treatment, treatment as usual, attention controls, and alternative treatments; benefits across a range of outcomes; longer-term effects; outcomes for different delivery formats; and amongst children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and children with intellectual impairments.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of CBT for childhood anxiety disorders, in comparison with waitlist/no treatment, treatment as usual (TAU), attention control, alternative treatment, and medication.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (all years to 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (each to October 2019), international trial registries, and conducted grey literature searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of CBT that involved direct contact with the child, parent, or both, and included non-CBT comparators (waitlist/no treatment, treatment as usual, attention control, alternative treatment, medication). Participants were younger than age 19, and met diagnostic criteria for an anxiety disorder diagnosis. Primary outcomes were remission of primary anxiety diagnosis post-treatment, and acceptability (number of participants lost to post-treatment assessment), and secondary outcomes included remission of all anxiety diagnoses, reduction in anxiety symptoms, reduction in depressive symptoms, improvement in global functioning, adverse effects, and longer-term effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 87 studies and 5964 participants in quantitative analyses. Compared with waitlist/no treatment, CBT probably increases post-treatment remission of primary anxiety diagnoses (CBT: 49.4%, waitlist/no treatment: 17.8%; OR 5.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.90 to 7.60; n = 2697, 39 studies, moderate quality); NNTB 3 (95% CI 2.25 to 3.57) and all anxiety diagnoses (OR 4.43, 95% CI 2.89 to 6.78; n = 2075, 28 studies, moderate quality). Low-quality evidence did not show a difference between CBT and TAU in post-treatment primary anxiety disorder remission (OR 3.19, 95% CI 0.90 to 11.29; n = 487, 8 studies), but did suggest CBT may increase remission from all anxiety disorders compared to TAU (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.16 to 6.46; n = 203, 5 studies). Compared with attention control, CBT may increase post-treatment remission of primary anxiety disorders (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.89; n = 822, 10 studies, low quality) and all anxiety disorders (OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.22 to 6.17; n = 378, 5 studies, low quality). There was insufficient available data to compare CBT to alternative treatments on post-treatment remission of primary anxiety disorders, and low-quality evidence showed there may be little to no difference between these groups on post-treatment remission of all anxiety disorders (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.23; n = 401, 4 studies) Low-quality evidence did not show a difference for acceptability between CBT and waitlist/no treatment (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.41; n=3158, 45 studies), treatment as usual (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.56; n = 441, 8 studies), attention control (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.49; n = 797, 12 studies) and alternative treatment (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.61 to 4.13; n=515, 7 studies). No adverse effects were reported across all studies; however, in the small number of studies where any reference was made to adverse effects, it was not clear that these were systematically monitored. Results from the anxiety symptom outcomes, broader outcomes, longer-term outcomes and subgroup analyses are provided in the text. We did not find evidence of consistent differences in outcomes according to delivery formats (e.g. individual versus group; amount of therapist contact time) or amongst samples with and without ASD, and no studies included samples of children with intellectual impairments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CBT is probably more effective in the short-term than waiting lists/no treatment, and may be more effective than attention control. We found little to no evidence across outcomes that CBT is superior to usual care or alternative treatments, but our confidence in these findings are limited due to concerns about the amount and quality of available evidence, and we still know little about how best to efficiently improve outcomes.

Outcome of Chair-Side Dental Fear Treatment: Long-Term Follow-Up in Public Health Setting

Aim

Purpose of this practice and data-based study was to evaluate the outcome of dental fear treatment of patients referred to the Clinic for Fearful Dental Patients (CFDP) in the primary oral health care, City of Oulu, Finland, during period 2000–2005.

Methods

A psychological approach including behavioral interventions and cognitive behavioral therapy (BT/CBT) was used for all participants combined with conscious sedation or dental general anesthesia (DGA), if needed. The outcome was considered successful if later dental visits were carried out without any notifications in the patient records of behavioral problems or sedation. Data collection was made in 2006; the average length of the observation period from the last visit in the CFPD to data collection was 2 y 3 m (SD 1 y 5 m). All information was available for 163 patients (mean age 8.9 y at referral). Study population was dominated by males (58.0%). Cause for referrals was mostly dental fear (81.0%) or lack of cooperation.

Results

The success rate was 69.6% among females and 68.1% among males. Success seemed to be (p=0.053) higher for those treated in ≤12 years compared with the older ones. The participants, without need for dental general anesthesia (DGA) in the CFDP, had significantly a higher success rate (81.4%) compared with those who did (54.8%, p < 0.001). Use of conscious oral sedation (p=0.300) or N₂O (p=0.585) was not associated with the future success.

Conclusions

A chair-side approach seems successful in a primary health care setting for treating dental fear, especially in early childhood. Use of sedation seems not to improve the success rate.

Psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

This is the second update of a Cochrane Review (Issue 4, 2006). Pain and distress from needle-related procedures are common during childhood and can be reduced through use of psychological interventions (cognitive or behavioral strategies, or both). Our first review update (Issue 10, 2013) showed efficacy of distraction and hypnosis for needle-related pain and distress in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched six electronic databases for relevant trials: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; PsycINFO; Embase; Web of Science (ISI Web of Knowledge); and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). We sent requests for additional studies to pediatric pain and child health electronic listservs. We also searched registries for relevant completed trials: clinicaltrials.gov; and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int.trialsearch). We conducted searches up to September 2017 to identify records published since the last review update in 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included peer-reviewed published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least five participants per study arm, comparing a psychological intervention with a control or comparison group. Trials involved children aged two to 19 years undergoing any needle-related medical procedure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data and assessed risks of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We examined pain and distress assessed by child self-report, observer global report, and behavioral measurement (primary outcomes). We also examined any reported physiological outcomes and adverse events (secondary outcomes). We used meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of identified psychological interventions relative to a comparator (i.e. no treatment, other active treatment, treatment as usual, or waitlist) for each outcome separately. We used Review Manager 5 software to compute standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 59 trials (20 new for this update) with 5550 participants. Needle procedures primarily included venipuncture, intravenous insertion, and vaccine injections. Studies included children aged two to 19 years, with few trials focused on adolescents. The most common psychological interventions were distraction (n = 32), combined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT; n = 18), and hypnosis (n = 8). Preparation/information (n = 4), breathing (n = 4), suggestion (n = 3), and memory alteration (n = 1) were also included. Control groups were often 'standard care', which varied across studies. Across all studies, 'Risk of bias' scores indicated several domains at high or unclear risk, most notably allocation concealment, blinding of participants and outcome assessment, and selective reporting. We downgraded the quality of evidence largely due to serious study limitations, inconsistency, and imprecision.Very low- to low-quality evidence supported the efficacy of distraction for self-reported pain (n = 30, 2802 participants; SMD -0.56, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.33) and distress (n = 4, 426 participants; SMD -0.82, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.18), observer-reported pain (n = 11, 1512 participants; SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.23) and distress (n = 5, 1067 participants; SMD -0.72, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.03), and behavioral distress (n = 7, 500 participants; SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.04). Distraction was not efficacious for behavioral pain (n = 4, 309 participants; SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.03). Very low-quality evidence indicated hypnosis was efficacious for reducing self-reported pain (n = 5, 176 participants; SMD -1.40, 95% CI -2.32 to -0.48) and distress (n = 5, 176 participants; SMD -2.53, 95% CI -3.93 to -1.12), and behavioral distress (n = 6, 193 participants; SMD -1.15, 95% CI -1.76 to -0.53), but not behavioral pain (n = 2, 69 participants; SMD -0.38, 95% CI -1.57 to 0.81). No studies assessed hypnosis for observer-reported pain and only one study assessed observer-reported distress. Very low- to low-quality evidence supported the efficacy of combined CBT for observer-reported pain (n = 4, 385 participants; SMD -0.52, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.30) and behavioral distress (n = 11, 1105 participants; SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.14), but not self-reported pain (n = 14, 1359 participants; SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.03), self-reported distress (n = 6, 234 participants; SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.04), observer-reported distress (n = 6, 765 participants; SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.50), or behavioral pain (n = 2, 95 participants; SMD -0.65, 95% CI -2.36 to 1.06). Very low-quality evidence showed efficacy of breathing interventions for self-reported pain (n = 4, 298 participants; SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.86 to -0.22), but there were too few studies for meta-analysis of other outcomes. Very low-quality evidence revealed no effect for preparation/information (n = 4, 313 participants) or suggestion (n = 3, 218 participants) for any pain or distress outcome. Given only a single trial, we could draw no conclusions about memory alteration. Adverse events of respiratory difficulties were only reported in one breathing intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified evidence supporting the efficacy of distraction, hypnosis, combined CBT, and breathing interventions for reducing children's needle-related pain or distress, or both. Support for the efficacy of combined CBT and breathing interventions is new from our last review update due to the availability of new evidence. The quality of trials and overall evidence remains low to very low, underscoring the need for improved methodological rigor and trial reporting. Despite low-quality evidence, the potential benefits of reduced pain or distress or both support the evidence in favor of using these interventions in clinical practice.

Cognitive behaviour therapy for anxious paediatric dental patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of evidence about cognitive behaviour therapy in the management of dentally anxious children.

AIM

To systematically review evidence of the effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy for children with dental anxiety or dental phobia.

DESIGN

Clinical trial registries, grey literature, and electronic databases, including The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS/BBO, and PsycINFO, were searched (April 2018). The reference lists of relevant studies were hand-searched. Randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effects of cognitive behaviour therapy on dental anxiety or on acceptance of dental treatment in dental patients up to 18 years were included. Two trained and calibrated reviewers performed the study selection and risk of bias assessment. The quality of the evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

Six studies with a total of 269 patients, aged 41 months to 18 years, were included. Cognitive behaviour therapy decreased level of anxiety compared to control groups and improved cooperation/behaviour, although the quality of the evidence was low.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive behaviour therapy produces better anxiety reduction than diverse behavioural management techniques but the evidence was of low quality and further studies in children are needed.