Literature DB >> 27446999

A randomized split-mouth clinical trial comparing 
pain experienced during palatal injections with traditional syringe versus controlled-flow delivery Calaject technique.

Jeanette Romero-Galvez, Leonardo Berini-Aytés, Rui Figueiredo, Josep Arnabat-Dominguez.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the pain experienced by patients during injections of local anesthesia in the palate using the traditional syringe and the controlled flow technique with the Calaject system. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A single-blind, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial was performed. Twenty-five volunteers were recruited in the Dental Hospital of the University of Barcelona, Spain. Each participant received two injections (0.3 mL of mepivacaine 3%), one with the traditional syringe (control side) and another with the Calaject system (experimental side), both during the same session. Pain intensity was evaluated after each injection with a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS). A descriptive and bivariate statistical analysis was made.
RESULTS: The mean pain experienced was 44.8 mm (standard deviation [SD] 19.0, range 8-72) with the traditional injection and 28.8 mm (SD 19.7, range 8-72) with the Calaject system (P < .001). Moderate/severe pain was more frequently referred in the control side (68%) in comparison with the experimental side (28%).
CONCLUSION: Given the parameters of this study's design, the injection of local anesthetics in the palatal area with the Calaject controlled-flow system seems to reduce pain, in comparison to the use of a traditional syringe.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27446999     DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a36566

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quintessence Int        ISSN: 0033-6572            Impact factor:   1.677


  7 in total

1.  Prospective Study on PDL Anesthesia as an Aide to Decrease Palatal Infiltration Pain.

Authors:  Brian Crump; Al Reader; John Nusstein; Melissa Drum; Sara Fowler; John Draper
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2022-04-01

2.  "Comparative study of conventional anesthesia technique versus computerized system anesthesia: a randomized clinical trial".

Authors:  S Berrendero; O Hriptulova; M P Salido; F Martínez-Rus; G Pradíes
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-08-29       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  A randomized split-mouth clinical trial comparing pain experienced during palatal injections with two different computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery systems.

Authors:  Anna Riba-Roca; Rui Figueiredo; Stanley F Malamed; Josep Arnabat-Dominguez
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-12-01

4.  Pain perception following computer-controlled versus conventional dental anesthesia: randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sameh Attia; Thomas Austermann; Andreas May; Mohamed Mekhemar; Jonas Conrad; Michael Knitschke; Sebastian Böttger; Hans-Peter Howaldt; Abanoub Riad
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 3.747

5.  Painless palatal local anesthetic injection: A low-cost, effective technique.

Authors:  Nakul Uppal; Mayank Kumar
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar

6.  Comparison of perceived pain and patients' satisfaction with traditional local anesthesia and single tooth anesthesia: A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Mohammad I Al-Obaida; Mehdiya Haider; Rawan Hashim; Wafa AlGheriri; Sree Lalita Celur; Samar A Al-Saleh; Ebtissam M Al-Madi
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2019-10-06       Impact factor: 1.337

7.  Pain Experienced during Various Dental Procedures: Clinical Trial Comparing the Use of Traditional Syringes with the Controlled-Flow Delivery Dentapen® Technique.

Authors:  Erick Rafael Fernández-Castellano; Leticia Alejandra Blanco-Antona; Purificación Vicente-Galindo; Víctor Amor-Esteban; Javier Flores-Fraile
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 2.430

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.