Estimating the Need for Sedation in Patients with Dental Anxiety and Medical Complexities Reporting to Tertiary Care Dental Hospital Using the IOSN Tool

Modern sedative agents and techniques used in dentistry for patients with special needs: A review

According to the World Health Organisation, approximately 1.3 billion people worldwide experience substantial disability due to physical, mental or sensory impairment. People with special needs require special consideration and more time or altered delivery methods when receiving dental treatments. Various factors, such as patients' lack of cooperation, cognitive impairment and complex medical status, may lead dental practitioners to recommend conscious sedation. Several pharmacological agents and administrative routes are available, which achieve varying levels of sedation ranging from minimal to deep. Pre-operative assessment and careful case selection are necessary to determine the appropriate sedative agent, route of administration and level of sedation for each patient. Thus, a thorough understanding of the pharmacokinetics, risks and benefits, and implications of various sedatives available for PSN is essential to achieve the desired clinical outcomes. This review critically presents the considerations associated with the use of various sedative agents for PSN in dentistry. Considerations include patients' pre-anaesthesia medical comorbidities, cardiorespiratory adverse effects and cooperativeness, and the viable alternative treatment modalities.

Determinants of Clinical Decision Making under Uncertainty in Dentistry: A Scoping Review

Clinical decision-making for diagnosing and treating oral and dental diseases consolidates multiple sources of complex information, yet individual clinical judgements are often made intuitively on limited heuristics to simplify decision making, which may lead to errors harmful to patients. This study aimed at systematically evaluating dental practitioners’ clinical decision-making processes during diagnosis and treatment planning under uncertainty. A scoping review was chosen as the optimal study design due to the heterogeneity and complexity of the topic. Key terms and a search strategy were defined, and the articles published in the repository of the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed) were searched, selected, and analysed in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Of the 478 studies returned, 64 relevant articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Studies that were included were based in 27 countries, with the majority from the UK and USA. Articles were dated from 1991 to 2022, with all being observational studies except four, which were experimental studies. Six major recurring themes were identified: clinical factors, clinical experience, patient preferences and perceptions, heuristics and biases, artificial intelligence and informatics, and existing guidelines. These results suggest that inconsistency in treatment recommendations is a real possibility and despite great advancements in dental science, evidence-based practice is but one of a multitude of complex determinants driving clinical decision making in dentistry. In conclusion, clinical decisions, particularly those made individually by a dental practitioner, are potentially prone to sub-optimal treatment and poorer patient outcomes.

Advantages of Sedation With Remimazolam Compared to Midazolam for the Removal of Impacted Tooth in Patients With Dental Anxiety

PURPOSE

Although midazolam is commonly used to sedate patients with dental anxiety, it has shortcomings that reduce the satisfaction of patients and doctors. The aim of this study was therefore to explore the advantages of remimazolam as a sedative.

METHODS

The study design was a prospective randomized controlled trial. Patients with dental anxiety and who were to undergo impacted tooth removal were randomized into remimazolam and midazolam groups. They were sedated with remimazolam or midazolam prior to receiving nerve blocker. The predictor variable was the type of sedative, while the primary outcome variables were the onset time, awakening time, recovery time, and postoperative side effects. Secondary outcome variables were the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale score before and after surgery, patient satisfaction and comfort levels scores, and doctor satisfaction level scores. Other variables included the patient demographics and the operation time. Data were analyzed using the Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney test, χ² test, and two-way repeated measurement ANOVA test (SPSS Version 25.0).

RESULTS

A total of 83 patients were included in this study, with 42 randomized to the remimazolam group and 41 to the midazolam group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic features and operation time. Patients in the remimazolam group had significantly shorter onset time, awakening time, and recovery time compared to those in the midazolam group (each P < .001). Postoperative side effects were more frequent in the midazolam group (P < .001). Following surgery, the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale scores in both groups were significantly lower than prior to surgery (P < .001). Satisfaction levels scores for the patients and doctor were higher in the remimazolam group than in the midazolam group (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of remimazolam results in faster onset, more rapid recovery, and lower incidence of postoperative side effects compared to midazolam, leading to improved satisfaction for patients and doctors. Remimazolam therefore appears to have several advantages over midazolam for the sedation of patients with dental anxiety associated with the removal of impacted teeth.