Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine ; : 345-355, 2021.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-891489

ABSTRACT

Background@#This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of external vibrating devices and counterstimulation on a child's dental anxiety, apprehension, and pain perception during local anesthetic administration. @*Methods@#This was a prospective, randomized, parallel-arm, single-blinded interventional, clinical trial. One hundred children aged 4–11 years, requiring pulp therapy or extraction under local anesthesia (LA), were recruited and allocated equally into two groups (1:1) based on the interventions used: Group BD (n = 50) received vibration using a Buzzy Ⓡ device {MMJ Labs, Atlanta, GE, USA} as a behavior guidance technique; Group CS (n = 50) received counterstimulation for the same technique. Anxiety levels [Venham's Clinical Anxiety Rating Scale (VCARS), Venham Picture Test (VPT), Pulse oximeter {Gibson, Fingertip Pulse Oximeter}, Beijing, China)] were assessed before, during, and after LA administration, while pain perception [Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBFPS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)] was evaluated immediately after injection. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student’s t-test to assess the mean difference between the two groups and the repeated measures ANOVA for testing the mean difference in the pulse rates. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. @*Results@#Significant differences in mean pulse rate values were observed in both groups. In contrast, the children in the BD group had higher diminution (P < 0.05), whereas the mean VCARS and VPT scores were conspicuous (P < 0.05). Based on the mean WBFPS and VAS scores, delayed pain perception after LA injection was more prominent in the BD group than in the CS group. @*Conclusion@#External vibration using a BuzzyⓇ device is comparatively better than counterstimulation in alleviating needle-associated anxiety in children requiring extraction and pulpectomy.

2.
Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine ; : 547-556, 2021.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-914904

ABSTRACT

Background@#This study aimed to determine the efficacy of Physics Forceps in pediatric dental extractions. @*Methods@#This was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial with a parallel-arm design and identical allocation ratio (1:1). Children (n=104) were randomly divided into two groups for extraction of mandibular primary teeth (group I: Physics Forceps; group II: conventional forceps). The outcome variables assessed in the study were the time taken for extraction, pre- and postoperative anxiety (using RMS pictorial scale), incidence of fractured teeth, and postoperative pain on the first and third days (using the Wong-Baker faces pain scale). @*Results@#A significant reduction (P < 0.001) in intraoperative time, anxiety, and incidence of tooth fracture was confined to group I. The pain significantly reduced from the first to the third postoperative day in both groups, but the mean reduction in RMS scores in the physics forceps group was far better than that in the conventional forceps group. @*Conclusion@#Physics Forceps aid in extraction of primary teeth with minimal trauma to supporting structures, as well as reducing anxiety in the pediatric population.

3.
Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine ; : 345-355, 2021.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-899193

ABSTRACT

Background@#This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of external vibrating devices and counterstimulation on a child's dental anxiety, apprehension, and pain perception during local anesthetic administration. @*Methods@#This was a prospective, randomized, parallel-arm, single-blinded interventional, clinical trial. One hundred children aged 4–11 years, requiring pulp therapy or extraction under local anesthesia (LA), were recruited and allocated equally into two groups (1:1) based on the interventions used: Group BD (n = 50) received vibration using a Buzzy Ⓡ device {MMJ Labs, Atlanta, GE, USA} as a behavior guidance technique; Group CS (n = 50) received counterstimulation for the same technique. Anxiety levels [Venham's Clinical Anxiety Rating Scale (VCARS), Venham Picture Test (VPT), Pulse oximeter {Gibson, Fingertip Pulse Oximeter}, Beijing, China)] were assessed before, during, and after LA administration, while pain perception [Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBFPS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)] was evaluated immediately after injection. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student’s t-test to assess the mean difference between the two groups and the repeated measures ANOVA for testing the mean difference in the pulse rates. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. @*Results@#Significant differences in mean pulse rate values were observed in both groups. In contrast, the children in the BD group had higher diminution (P < 0.05), whereas the mean VCARS and VPT scores were conspicuous (P < 0.05). Based on the mean WBFPS and VAS scores, delayed pain perception after LA injection was more prominent in the BD group than in the CS group. @*Conclusion@#External vibration using a BuzzyⓇ device is comparatively better than counterstimulation in alleviating needle-associated anxiety in children requiring extraction and pulpectomy.

4.
Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine ; : 277-288, 2019.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-764394

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the efficacy of virtual reality (VR) distraction and counter-stimulation (CS) on dental anxiety and pain perception to local anesthesia in children. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded interventional clinical trial with a parallel design was used. Seventy children 7–11 years old who required local anesthesia (LA) for pulp therapy or tooth extraction were recruited and allocated to two groups with equal distribution based on the intervention. Group CS (n = 35) received CS and Group VR (n = 35) received VR distraction with ANTVR glasses. Anxiety levels (using pulse rate) were evaluated before, during, and after administration of local anesthesia, while pain perception was assessed immediately after the injection. Wong-Baker faces pain-rating scale (WBFPS), visual analog scale (VAS), and Venham's clinical anxiety rating scale (VCARS) were used for pain evaluation. Student's t-test was used to test the mean difference between groups, and repeated measures ANOVA was used to test the mean difference of pulse rates. RESULTS: Significant differences in mean pulse rates were observed in both groups, while children in the VR group had a higher reduction (P < 0.05), and the mean VCARS scores were significant in the VR group (P < 0.05). Mean WBFPS scores showed less pain perception to LA needle prick in the CS group while the same change was observed in the VR group with VAS scores. CONCLUSIONS: VR distraction is better than CS for reducing anxiety to injection in children undergoing extraction and pulpectomy.


Subject(s)
Child , Humans , Anesthesia, Local , Anxiety , Dental Anxiety , Eyeglasses , Glass , Heart Rate , Needles , Pain Perception , Prospective Studies , Pulpectomy , Tooth Extraction , Visual Analog Scale
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL