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

Overview

Journal Int J Clin Pediatr Dent

Specialty Pediatrics

Date 2014 Oct 31

PMID 25356003

Citations 3

Authors

Neha Bansal

Sonali Saha

Jn Jaiswal

Firoza Samadi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

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.

Citing Articles

Comparison of Automatically Controlled Injection System with a Traditional. Syringe for Multiple Infiltrations in Children Aged 6-12 Years: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Beegum F, Monier E, Elshaboury S, Alghofaili A, Habibullah M, Karthika S J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024; 16(Suppl 2):S1535-S1538.

PMID: 38882898 PMC: 11174204. DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1214_23.

Topical Anesthesia in Pediatric Dentistry: An Update.

Tirupathi S, Rajasekhar S Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2023; 15(2):240-245.

PMID: 37457204 PMC: 10338943. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2355.

Role of intraseptal anesthesia for pain-free dental treatment.

Gazal G, Fareed W, Zafar M Saudi J Anaesth. 2016; 10(1):81-6.

PMID: 26955316 PMC: 4760049. DOI: 10.4103/1658-354X.169482.

References

Goodenough , van Dongen K , Brouwer , Champion . A comparison of the Faces Pain Scale and the Facial Affective Scale for children's estimates of the intensity and unpleasantness of needle pain during blood sampling. Eur J Pain. 2000; 3(4):301-315. DOI: 10.1053/eujp.1999.0136. View

Cho S, Drummond B, Anderson M, Williams S . Effectiveness of electronic dental anesthesia for restorative care in children. Pediatr Dent. 1998; 20(2):105-11. View

Krochak M, Friedman N . Using a precision-metered injection system to minimize dental injection anxiety. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1998; 19(2):137-40, 142-3, 146 passim; quiz 150. View

San Martin-Lopez A, Garrigos-Esparza L, Torre-Delgadillo G, Gordillo-Moscoso A, Hernandez-Sierra J, de Pozos-Guillen A . Clinical comparison of pain perception rates between computerized local anesthesia and conventional syringe in pediatric patients. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2005; 29(3):239-43. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.29.3.jgh607l870051882. View

Malamed S, QUINN C, Torgersen R, Thompson W . Electronic dental anesthesia for restorative dentistry. Anesth Prog. 1989; 36(4-5):195-8. PMC: 2190651. View

Grace E, Barnes D, Reid B, Flores M, GEORGE D . Computerized local dental anesthetic systems: patient and dentist satisfaction. J Dent. 2003; 31(1):9-12. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-5712(02)00130-6. View

Venham L . A self-report measure of situational anxiety for young children. Pediatr Dent. 1979; 1(2):91-6. View

Nicholson J, Berry T, Summitt J, Yuan C, Witten T . Pain perception and utility: a comparison of the syringe and computerized local injection techniques. Gen Dent. 2002; 49(2):167-73. View

Oztas N, Ulusu T, Bodur H, Dogan C . The wand in pulp therapy: an alternative to inferior alveolar nerve block. Quintessence Int. 2005; 36(7-8):559-64. View

10.

teDuits E, Goepferd S, Donly K, Pinkham J, Jakobsen J . The effectiveness of electronic dental anesthesia in children. Pediatr Dent. 1993; 15(3):191-6. View

11.

Shah M, Shivaswamy S, Jain S, Tambwekar S . A clinical comparison of pain perception and extent of area anesthetized by Wand(®) and a traditional syringe. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2012; 16(2):207-12. PMC: 3459500. DOI: 10.4103/0972-124X.99263. View

12.

Rosa A, Sverzut C, Xavier S, Lavrador M . Clinical effectiveness of lidocaine and benzocaine for topical anesthesia. Anesth Prog. 2001; 46(3):97-9. PMC: 2148990. View

13.

Pashley E, Nelson R, Pashley D . Pressures created by dental injections. J Dent Res. 1981; 60(10):1742-8. DOI: 10.1177/00220345810600100301. View

14.

Hochman M, Chiarello D, Hochman C, Lopatkin R, Pergola S . Computerized local anesthetic delivery vs. traditional syringe technique. Subjective pain response. N Y State Dent J. 1997; 63(7):24-9. View

15.

Dowling J . Autonomic indices and reactive pain reports on the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Pain. 1982; 14(4):387-392. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(82)90146-4. View

16.

Langthasa M, Yeluri R, Jain A, Munshi A . Comparison of the pain perception in children using comfort control syringe and a conventional injection technique during pediatric dental procedures. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2013; 30(4):323-8. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.108931. View

17.

Dhindsa A, Pandit I, Srivastava N, Gugnani N . Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of electronic dental anesthesia with 2% lignocaine in various minor pediatric dental procedures: A clinical study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2011; 2(1):27-30. PMC: 3220170. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.79305. View

18.

Munshi A, Hegde A, Girdhar D . Clinical evaluation of electronic dental anesthesia for various procedures in pediatric dentistry. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2001; 24(3):199-204. View

19.

Myers D, KRAMER W, SULLIVAN R . A study of the heart action of the child dental patient. ASDC J Dent Child. 1972; 39(2):99-106. View

20.

Wilson S, Molina L, Preisch J, Weaver J . The effect of electronic dental anesthesia on behavior during local anesthetic injection in the young, sedated dental patient. Pediatr Dent. 1999; 21(1):12-7. View