Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing One Percent Buffered Versus Two Percent Unbuffered Lidocaine Injections in Children.

Purpose: Buffered local anesthetics offer an alternative to conventional, unbuffered anesthetic formulations; however, evidence about their use in children is scant. The purpose of this study was to determine the anesthetic and physiologic differences associated with the use of buffered one percent and unbuffered two percent lidocaine (both with 1:100,000 epinephrine) in children. Methods: In this randomized, double-blinded, crossover study, 25 children ages 10 to 12 years old received two inferior alveolar never blocks, at least one week apart, randomized to alternating sequences of two drug formulations: (1) formula A-three mL buffered one percent lidocaine (i.e., including 0.3 mL of 8.4 percent sodium bicarbonate); or (2) formula B-three mL unbuffered two percent lidocaine. Primary outcomes were mean blood lidocaine levels (15 minutes post-injection), timing of clinical signs onset, response to pain on injection, and duration of anesthesia. Analyses relied upon analysis of variance for crossover study designs and a P<0.05 statistical significance criterion. Results: The buffered formulation resulted in significantly lower mean blood lidocaine levels compared to unbuffered-a 63 percent (P<0.05) weight-adjusted relative decrease. The authors found no important differences in pain upon injection, onset, and duration of anesthesia. Conclusion: The buffered local anesthetic formulation showed equal effectiveness with a double-concentration unbuffered formulation while resulting in lower mean blood lidocaine levels-an important gain for the prevention of anesthetic toxicity.

Pregnant Women's Infant Oral Health Knowledge and Beliefs: Influence of Having Given Birth and of Having a Child in the Home.

Introduction Prenatal oral health interventions can positively impact maternal and child oral health, yet limited information exists concerning how to best educate pregnant women about infant oral health. Our objective was to examine the influence of having given birth on pregnant women's infant oral health knowledge and beliefs. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected from a cross-sectional survey of pregnant women ≥18 years old attending UNC's Ultrasound Clinic. Four binomial items were categorized as infant knowledge (IK) and five rated on a Likert scale (1-5) as infant belief (IB). Overall IK and IB scores were calculated, averaging the items within each construct. Respondents were categorized into two groups: multiparous (N = 268), women having at least one previous live birth and a child between 2 and 6 years old, or nulliparous (N = 186), women with no previous live births or a child between 2 and 6 years old. Regression models for IK and IB were conducted using SAS 9.2 with maternal demographic characteristics, dental utilization, and birth history as explanatory variables (p ≤ 0.05). Results IK was affected by race (p = 0.04), mother's oral health self-rating (p = 0.0002), and birth history (p < 0.0001). On average, IK was 0.12 units higher in subjects with a history of giving birth, adjusting for explanatory variables. IB was influenced by maternal oral health beliefs (p = 0.002) and history of access to dental care (p = 0.0002). IB did not differ based on birth history (p = 0.17). Discussion The influence of birth history on pregnant women's infant oral health knowledge and beliefs can be considered in future intervention designs to maximize available resources.