Job Torres-Gomez1, Stephen C Arnason2, Wyeth L Hoopes2, Kraig S Vandewalle3. 1. DMD, MS. Capt, USAF, DC. Deputy Program Director. Advanced Education in General Dentistry Residency. Air Force Postgraduate Dental School. Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. 2501 Capehart Rd. Offutt, Air Force Base, Bellevue, NE, USA. 2. DDS, MS. Maj, USAF, DC. Training Officer. Advanced Education in General Dentistry Residency. Air Force Postgraduate Dental School. Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. 1615 Truemper St. Joint Base San Antonio - Lackland, TX, USA. 3. DDS, MS. Col (ret), USAF, DC. Director of Dental Research. Advanced Education in General Dentistry Residency. Air Force Postgraduate Dental School. Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. 1615 Truemper St. Joint Base San Antonio - Lackland, TX, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a stress ball as a distraction technique on stress levels of patients undergoing a dental procedure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized, split-mouth design was conducted using 20 adult subjects requiring scaling and root planing (Sc/RP) in all four quadrants. Each side of the mouth (maxillary/mandibular) received Sc/RP with local anesthetic with or without the use of a stress-ball distraction over two separate sessions. Subjects completed two pre-procedural questionnaires (Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI; Modified Dental Anxiety Scale, MDAS) before and after each treatment session. A Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) sensor (Neulog) was used throughout each session to measure skin conductance or sweat. RESULTS: No significant difference in GSR scores was found during treatment with or without the use of the stress ball. Also, no significant differences in the change in STAI or MDAS scores were found with or without the use of a stress ball. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study found that the use of a stress ball as a distraction technique did not result in any significant reduction in stress levels in subjects undergoing scaling and root planing with local anesthesia. Key words:Anxiety, distraction, stress ball. Copyright:
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a stress ball as a distraction technique on stress levels of patients undergoing a dental procedure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized, split-mouth design was conducted using 20 adult subjects requiring scaling and root planing (Sc/RP) in all four quadrants. Each side of the mouth (maxillary/mandibular) received Sc/RP with local anesthetic with or without the use of a stress-ball distraction over two separate sessions. Subjects completed two pre-procedural questionnaires (Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI; Modified Dental Anxiety Scale, MDAS) before and after each treatment session. A Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) sensor (Neulog) was used throughout each session to measure skin conductance or sweat. RESULTS: No significant difference in GSR scores was found during treatment with or without the use of the stress ball. Also, no significant differences in the change in STAI or MDAS scores were found with or without the use of a stress ball. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study found that the use of a stress ball as a distraction technique did not result in any significant reduction in stress levels in subjects undergoing scaling and root planing with local anesthesia. Key words:Anxiety, distraction, stress ball. Copyright:
Authors: Leah I Stein Duker; Mollianne Grager; Willa Giffin; Natasha Hikita; José C Polido Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-18 Impact factor: 3.390