Comparative evaluation of pain perception with a new needle-free system and dental needle method in children: a randomized clinical trial

Comparative Evaluation of New Needleless Local Anesthetic System (INJEX) and Conventional Syringe Needle Technique during Pulpotomy Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The dreaded sensation of pain in the dental chair has a significant impact on children's behavior. This study aimed to compare and contrast the perception of pain and patient behavior between the use of INJEX and the conventional syringe needle technique during pulpotomy among children.

METHODS

A randomized clinical trial was designed and conducted among pediatric dentistry patients aged 6-12 years old. Fifty-eight children were divided into two groups, conventional syringe needle and INJEX, using simple randomization method applying the sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelope method of allocation concealment. Anesthesia was administered to the groups as local infiltration by a single operator following routine behavior guidance techniques. After 3 min, pulpotomy was performed using the standard protocol. The Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale and Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (WBS) were used to assess the intensity of pain, while the Frankl behavior rating scale (FBRS) was used to assess the children's behavior.

RESULTS

During anesthesia, most of the participants in the INJEX group (median = 3) had higher FBRS scores compared with the conventional syringe needle group (median = 2), and the difference was very highly significant (p-value < 0.001). Analyzing the FLACC scores during local anesthesia administration revealed a high statistical significance (p-value < 0.01) across the two groups. A very high statistically significant difference (p-values < 0.001) with higher WBS scores for pain intensity was seen in the group using conventional syringe needles.

CONCLUSIONS

INJEX administration significantly reduced the intensity of pain experienced by the children and helped maintain a positive attitude among them during pulpotomy. It provided a positive and comfortable experience for both the child and the practitioner. Therefore, it can serve as an excellent alternative to conventional needle anesthesia.

Efficacy of articaine anesthesia with needle-free/Comfort-in method and conventional needle injection in dental patients with irreversible pulpitis: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the anesthetic efficacy of articaine with the needle-free/Comfort-in™ method compared to the conventional needle method. To assess pain during anesthesia application, onset of anesthesia and patient`s self-reported quality of life-related to oral health after the dental emergency appointment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This parallel, randomized clinical trial was conducted by a single operator/dentist in the state of Maranhao, northeast of Brazil. Included participants were adult dental patients with one molar (maxillary) or premolar (maxillary or mandibular) tooth diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. The primary outcome was the anesthetic efficacy, measured using a combination of electrical and cold pulp tests (cold + EPT) and the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary outcomes were pain during anesthesia application, onset of anesthesia, and patient`s quality-of-life (measured with the OHIP-14).

RESULTS

62 patients were randomized in the anesthesia needle-free group and Comfort-in group (34.26 ± 10.786 × 33.29 ± 8.399 years old, respectively). The group of patients in the Comfort-in group had 71.0% success. Patients from the Comfort-in group reported statistically lower pain during the anesthesia application than patients from the conventional group (2.13 ± 2.172 × 6.03 ± 3.146 NRS scores, respectively) as well as immediately after the anesthetic procedure. Patients self-reported negative impact in quality of life was similar between groups before (p > 0.05) and after (p > 0.05) the dental emergency.

CONCLUSIONS

Comfort-in™ had similar efficacy to the conventional needle method.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This trial showed that it is possible to anesthetize patients with tooth pulpits without using needles to provide comfort mainly to anxious patients.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy as an alternative method to local anesthesia injection in pediatric dentistry

Background

The idea of receiving local anesthesia (LA) via an injection is a major source of dental fear and anxiety. In children, dental anxiety is considered the main reason for avoiding dental treatments. Moreover, there are potential complications during/after LA administration. Thus, it is necessary to search for painless, low-risk, and nonpharmacological anesthetic approaches.

Aim

This study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy as an alternative method to LA injection for conventional restorative treatments in pediatric patients.

Settings and Design

This was a split-mouth randomized clinical study.

Materials and Methods

The study included 15 children between 6 and 12 years old. Each child had 2 similar contralateral caries lesions in the first permanent molars in the same jaw, total (30) teeth. For each child, one tooth was treated under conventional LA injection and the other was treated under PBM-based anesthesia. The Wong-Baker's Faces Pain Scale was used for reporting the pain and discomfort levels at the end of the treatments.

Statistical Analysis

Data statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20. Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare between the groups.

Results

The PBM-based anesthesia group recorded a mean pain score of 2.27 ± 1.28. The conventional LA group recorded a mean pain score of 1.73 ± 0.7. The difference between the groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.168).

Conclusions

PBM-based anesthesia may be an optional alternative to LA injection for conventional restorative treatments in children with dental anxiety, needle phobia, or special needs, and it deserves further studies and improvement.

A comparative assessment of efficacy and preference between needleless device INJEX and insulin syringe for anesthetizing primary maxillary teeth in children aged 4-9 years: A split-mouth crossover randomized clinical study

insulin syringe for anesthetizing primary maxillary teeth in children aged 4-9 years.

Materials and Methods

This randomized clinical study included 46 children aged 4-9 years. The patients were digitally allotted to receive 4% articaine for extractions of primary maxillary teeth, either using needleless device INJEX or insulin syringe on each side of the maxillary arch, in two different appointments after a 1-week washout period. Pain perception was measured by the subjective (Faces Pain Scale-Revised [FPS-R]) and objective pain scores (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability [FLACC]) and hemodynamic parameters (heart rate and oxygen saturation) during LA administration and during extractions. After the second appointment, children were asked about their preference between needleless device INJEX and insulin syringe.

Results

On evaluating subjective pain scores with FPS-R, intergroup differences between the INJEX and insulin syringe groups were found statistically insignificant, both during LA administration (P = 0.101) and extraction (P = 0.080). However, on assessing pain objectively during extraction using FLACC, the mean pain score was less with insulin syringe (2.78) as compared to INJEX (4.72) and the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.000). There was no significant difference in patient preference between the two methods.

Conclusion

Pain perception was minimal during local anesthesia administration using needleless device INJEX; however, its clinical efficacy during extractions was reported to be lower than insulin syringe.

Background

Managing pain in children is the most challenging task as it forms the foundation for instilling positive behavior toward dental treatment. Adequate local anesthesia (LA) is the cornerstone of pain management. However, the fear of needles, particularly in young children, can result in complete avoidance and refusal of treatment.

Aim

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and preference between needleless device INJEX and.

Effect of a needle-free system versus traditional anesthesia on pain perception during palatal injections in children

BACKGROUND

Needle-free injection systems can contribute to the prevention of needle-related pain during palatal infiltration anesthesia (PIA) in children. Research on this topic in children is required.

AIM

The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the effectiveness and patient preference of a needle-free system versus traditional anesthesia (TA) on pain perception during PIA in children.

DESIGN

The study was designed as a randomized, controlled crossover clinical study with 48 children aged 6-12 years requiring dental treatment with PIA in bilateral maxillary primary molars. TA was applied on one side and the Comfort-in™ injection system (CIS) on the other side in two separate sessions. Then, patient preference was recorded. The pain perception during PIA was evaluated using the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (PRS) and the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) Scale. The data were analyzed for statistical significance (p < .05).

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences between the TA and the CIS according to the PRS and FLACC Scale scores. On both scales, significantly higher pain ratings were observed in the TA group during PIA (p < .001). There was a statistically significant difference in terms of patient preference (p < .001). Although 77.1% (n = 37) of the children preferred the CIS, 22.9% (n = 11) preferred the TA. Moreover, patient preference for the CIS was significantly higher in older children (p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of a needle-free system during PIA ensured a decrease in pain perception in children.