OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to compare the pain of injection and post-injection pain of the AMSA injection using the computer-assisted Wand Plus injection system versus a conventional syringe. STUDY DESIGN: Using a crossover design, 40 subjects randomly received2 blinded AMSA injections using the Wand Plus system and a conventional syringe, at 2 separate appointments. The AMSA injection site was centered halfway between the midpalatine raphe and gingival margin of the first and second premolars. The pain of needle insertion, anesthetic solution deposition pain, and postinjection pain were recorded on a Heft-Parker VAS for the 2 AMSA injections. RESULTS: For needle insertion, 38% of the subjects had moderate/severe pain with the Wand Plus((R)) and 34% moderate/severe pain with the conventional syringe, with no significant difference between techniques. There was a significant difference for solution deposition pain, with the conventional syringe causing more moderate/severe pain (42% conventional vs. 25% for the Wand Plus. Regarding postinjection pain, after numbness wore off there was no significant difference between the Wand Plus injection technique (0% moderate pain) and the conventional syringe technique (8% moderate pain). Postinjection, approximately 8% to 10% of the subjects experienced slight palatal swelling and 2% experienced temporary numbness. These problems resolved quickly and were considered minor. CONCLUSIONS: The AMSA injection, using the Wand Plus, resulted in similar pain ratings for needle insertion as the conventional syringe but statistically lower pain ratings upon anesthetic solution deposition. However, the AMSA, using either the Wand Plus or a conventional syringe, has the potential to be a painful injection. We found the incidence of postinjection pain and sequelae was low with both techniques.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to compare the pain of injection and post-injection pain of the AMSA injection using the computer-assisted Wand Plus injection system versus a conventional syringe. STUDY DESIGN: Using a crossover design, 40 subjects randomly received 2 blinded AMSA injections using the Wand Plus system and a conventional syringe, at 2 separate appointments. The AMSA injection site was centered halfway between the midpalatine raphe and gingival margin of the first and second premolars. The pain of needle insertion, anesthetic solution deposition pain, and postinjection pain were recorded on a Heft-Parker VAS for the 2 AMSA injections. RESULTS: For needle insertion, 38% of the subjects had moderate/severe pain with the Wand Plus((R)) and 34% moderate/severe pain with the conventional syringe, with no significant difference between techniques. There was a significant difference for solution deposition pain, with the conventional syringe causing more moderate/severe pain (42% conventional vs. 25% for the Wand Plus. Regarding postinjection pain, after numbness wore off there was no significant difference between the Wand Plus injection technique (0% moderate pain) and the conventional syringe technique (8% moderate pain). Postinjection, approximately 8% to 10% of the subjects experienced slight palatal swelling and 2% experienced temporary numbness. These problems resolved quickly and were considered minor. CONCLUSIONS: The AMSA injection, using the Wand Plus, resulted in similar pain ratings for needle insertion as the conventional syringe but statistically lower pain ratings upon anesthetic solution deposition. However, the AMSA, using either the Wand Plus or a conventional syringe, has the potential to be a painful injection. We found the incidence of postinjection pain and sequelae was low with both techniques.