A clinical comparison of pain perception and extent of area anesthetized by Wand(®) and a traditional syringe

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.

Do Computerized Delivery System Promote Less Pain and Anxiety Compared to Traditional Local Anesthesia in Dental Procedures? A Systematic Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to assess whether the use of computerized devices to deliver local anesthesia results in less pain and anxiety compared to traditional anesthesia in adult dental procedures.

METHODS

This review was registered at PROSPERO (CRD 42021265046), based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and was structured according to the PICO strategy. The studies were selected based on eligibility criteria, and data were collected by 1 author and reviewed by another.

RESULTS

Nine of the 10 studies included were randomized controlled trials. Differences related to pain and anxiety were observed, which favored computerized techniques; however, caution should be exercised when interpreting these results due to differences in assessment methods. The studies used different local anesthetics, including 2% lidocaine, 4% articaine, or 3% mepivacaine with epinephrine diluted 1:80,000 to 1:200,000. A total of 560 patients were evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

Computerized anesthesia devices yielded better results than conventionally delivered anesthesia after qualitative evaluation. Nevertheless, conventional anesthesia is widely used, safe, and effective. Due to the heterogeneity among the included studies, it is strongly recommended that new randomized clinical trials using well-defined methodologies be performed to improve the quality of evidence regarding this topic.

Patient evaluations after local anesthesia with a computer-assisted method and a conventional syringe before and after reflection time: A prospective randomized controlled trial

Objectives

This prospective randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate and compare patient response to a conventional syringe and a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD) both immediately and after reflection time, including the impact of anesthesia duration.

Methods

Twenty adult patients (10 men and 10 women) with at least two tooth-neck defects each in different quadrants were treated with local buccal infiltration anesthesia. Using split-mouth design, one quadrant was anesthetized using a conventional syringe, the other with CCLAD. The time elapsed between time of injection and time of disappearance of numbness was recorded. Patients were asked to mark on a Visual Analog Scale their visual impression of the device regarding anxiety-inducement, their sensation of mucosal puncture, pain during administration, and pain perception during treatment for the two different methods as well as future preference immediately after treatment and after reflection time.

Results

The level of anxiety-inducement and pain during administration were ranked three times higher with the conventional syringe (35.95%-11.85%, p < 0.001 and 21.3%-7.7%, p = 0.005, respectively). There was no difference in mean sensation of mucosal puncture, nor a statistically significant correlation between duration of administration and time until disappearance of numbness. Once anesthesia was administered, no pain during treatment was detected using either method. Patients' preference of methods changed significantly with time in favor of CCLAD (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

The use of CCLAD increased patients' comfort visually and in terms of administration; patients' preference in favor of CCLAD increased with time.

Clinical significance

Patients' preference of CCLAD over against the conventional syringe, even more so after reflection time, can imply the preference of CCLAD for clinicians, too, in order to enhance patients' and clinicians' comfort.

"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.

Assessment of computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system for pain control during restorative procedures: A randomized controlled trial

Background. . Local anesthesia is given to decrease pain perception during dental treatments, but it may itself be a reason for pain and aggravate the dental fear. Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS) is one of the alternatives for decreasing the patients' pain during local anesthesia. This study compared the time required for the recovery from anesthesia, pain/discomfort during injection and pain/discomfort 24 hours after administering local anesthesia with CCLADS, a standard self-aspirating syringe and a conventional disposable 2-mL syringe. Methods. The study was conducted on 90 subjects (an age group of 20-40 years), who suffered from sensitivity during cavity preparation. They were randomly divided into three groups of 30 individuals each to receive intraligamentary anesthesia (2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline) using either of the three techniques: CCLADS, a standard self-aspirating syringe, or a conventional disposable 2-mL syringe. The onset of anesthesia, time required for recovery from anesthesia (in minutes), pain/discomfort during injection and pain/discomfort 24 hours after administering local anesthesia were recorded. Results. The time required for the onset of anesthesia and recovery from anesthesia was shorter with CCLADS (4.83±2.31 and 34.2±1.895, respectively) as compared to the standard self-aspirating group (10.83±1.90 and 43.5±7.581, respectively) and the conventional group (11.00±2.03 and 43.5±6.453, respectively) (P<0.001). The patients in the CCLADS group experienced no pain during local anesthesia administration as compared to the patients in the self-aspirating and conventional groups. The CCLADS and self-aspirating groups showed lower pain response as compared to the conventional group for pain after 24 hours. Conclusion. CCLADS can be an effective and pain-free alternative to conventional local anesthetic procedures.

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.

Current status of the anterior middle superior alveolar anesthetic injection for periodontal procedures in the maxilla

Periodontal procedures require adequate anesthesia not only to ensure the patient's comfort but also to enhance the operator's performance and minimize chair time. In the maxilla, anesthesia is often achieved using highly traumatic nerve blocks, apart from multiple local infiltrations through the buccal vestibule. In recent years, anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) field block has been claimed to be a less traumatic alternative to several of these conventional injections, and it has many other advantages. This critical review of the existing literature aimed to discuss the rationale, mechanism, effectiveness, extent, and duration of AMSA injections for periodontal surgical and non-surgical procedures in the maxilla. It also focused on future prospects, particularly in relation to computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery systems, which aim to achieve the goal of pain-free anesthesia. A literature search of different databases was performed to retrieve relevant articles related to AMSA injections. After analyzing the existing data, it can be concluded that this anesthetic technique may be used as a predictable method of effective palatal anesthesia with adequate duration for different periodontal procedures. It has additional advantages of being less traumatic, requiring lesser amounts of local anesthetics and vasoconstrictors, as well as achieving good hemostasis. However, its effect on the buccal periodontium appears highly unpredictable.

Single tooth anesthesia versus conventional anesthesia: a cross-over study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to compare an electronic device, the Wand Injection System (Milestone Scientific Livingstone), with conventional anesthesia in terms of the following: pain sensation during anesthetic injection; effectiveness in achieving adequate anesthesia for a complete painless dental treatment; post-operative discomfort; and patient's anxiety toward dental treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty adults from 18 to 70 years were enrolled in this cross-over study. Each patient served as his/her own control being subject to two anesthesia techniques: conventional and Single Tooth Anesthesia (STA) performed with the Wand. A split-mouth design was adopted in which each tooth undergoing conservative restorative or endodontic treatment received anesthesia with both techniques at 1-week interval. Before anesthetic administration, the patients' anxiety levels were determined. Physiological parameteres were measured before, during, and after the two injection procedures, and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to assess pain of injection, discomfort, and anesthetic efficacy. Differences in assessment of pain's injection, discomfort, anesthetic efficacy, vital parameters (heart rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation), and state anxiety levels were analyzed using Student's t test (p value < 0.001).

RESULTS

The mean injection pain and post-operative discomfort ratings with Wand were lower than those with conventional syringe (p = 0.022 and p < 0.001, respectively). No differences were found in the assessment of anesthetic efficacy. Blood pressure and heart rate mean values were lower during the anesthesia performed with the Wand than with the conventional syringe (p < 0.001). The anxiety level was higher during the first appointment, independently from the device used for the injections.

CONCLUSION

The STA technique resulted in lower pain, discomfort, and lower intensity of physiological parameters.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Single Tooth Anesthesia could be an efficacious alternative to conventional procedures.

In vivo Evaluation of 4% Articaine and 2% Lignocaine Intraligamentary Injection Administered with Single Tooth Anesthesia-Wand

Background:

The available literature confirms the effectiveness of intraligamentary injections equal to nerve blocks and articaine equal to lignocaine with better depth of penetration for single tooth pulpectomy procedures with less postoperative soft tissue trauma. An advancement in the field of local anesthesia delivery is the Single Tooth Anesthesia-Wand (STA-Wand) which is relatively pain-free and offers comfort to the child.

Aims:

This study aims to evaluate and compare the anesthetic effectiveness and postoperative complications of 4% articaine and 2% lignocaine intraligamentary injection administered as single tooth anesthesia using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system, the STA-Wand.

Settings and Design:

Using a randomized, split-mouth, cross-over study design, twenty children aged 4–10 years who required bilateral mandibular pulpectomies were administered intraligamentary injections with 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine in two appointments using STA-Wand. Pain, anxiety, and cooperation levels were scored by an operator and an observer at four phases of treatment using Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale and Two-6 point Co-operation Anxiety Rating Scale. Results were tabulated and analyzed.

Statistical Analysis:

Mann–Whitney U-test, paired t-test, and Student's t-test.

Results:

Both the local anesthetic agents were equally effective with no significant difference (P > 0.05) throughout rest of the treatment procedure compared to injection phase in minimizing pain, anxiety, and gaining the cooperation levels of children whereas during injection phase, 4% articaine showed superior effectiveness in minimizing pain compared to 2% lignocaine (P = 0.054).

Conclusion:

Both the local anesthetic agents delivered using STA-Wand is clinically acceptable, effective, and safe for usage in children.

Comparative Analysis Between Computed and Conventional Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Techniques

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this randomized, double-blind, controlled trial was to compare the computed and conventional inferior alveolar nerve block techniques in symmetrically positioned inferior third molars.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Both computed and conventional anesthetic techniques were performed in 29 healthy patients (58 surgeries) aged between 18 and 40 years. The anesthetic of choice was 2% lidocaine with 1: 200,000 epinephrine. The Visual Analogue Scale assessed the pain variable after anesthetic infiltration. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using the Likert Scale. Heart and respiratory rates, mean time to perform technique, and the need for additional anesthesia were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Pain variable means were higher for the conventional technique as compared with computed, 3.45 ± 2.73 and 2.86 ± 1.96, respectively, but no statistically significant differences were found (P > 0.05). Patient satisfaction showed no statistically significant differences. The average computed technique runtime and the conventional were 3.85 and 1.61 minutes, respectively, showing statistically significant differences (P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The computed anesthetic technique showed lower mean pain perception, but did not show statistically significant differences when contrasted to the conventional technique.

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.

Pain Elimination during Injection with Newer Electronic Devices: A Comparative Evaluation in Children

AIM

The present study was taken up to clinically evaluate and compare effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulator (TENS) and comfort control syringe (CCS) in various pediatric dental procedures as an alternative to the conventional method of local anesthesia (LA) administration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety healthy children having at least one deciduous molar tooth indicated for extraction in either maxillary right or left quadrant in age group of 6 to 10 years were randomly divided into three equal groups having 30 subjects each. Group I: LA administration using conventional syringe, group II: LA administration using TENS along with the conventional syringe, group III: LA administration using CCS. After LA by the three techniques, pain, anxiety and heart rate were measured.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The observations, thus, obtained were subjected to statistical analysis using analysis of variance (ANOVA), student t-test and paired t-test.

RESULTS

The mean pain score was maximum in group I followed by group II, while group III revealed the minimum pain, where LA was administered using CCS. Mean anxiety score was maximum in group I followed by group II, while group III revealed the minimum score. Mean heart rate was maximum in group I followed in descending order by groups II and III.

CONCLUSION

The study supports the belief that CCS could be a viable alternative in comparison to the other two methods of LA delivery in children. How to cite this article: Bansal N, Saha S, Jaiswal JN, Samadi F. Pain Elimination during Injection with Newer Electronic Devices: A Comparative Evaluation in Children. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2014;7(2):71-76.