Assessing the Efficacy of Buffered Versus Nonbuffered Lidocaine in Dental Extractions: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Injections using buffered lidocaine may decrease discomfort, have a quicker onset, and be a more efficacious local anesthetic. Previous studies have been inconclusive in the oral context. PURPOSE: To address if bicarbonate buffered 2% lidocaine can decrease pain from the use of local anesthesia, has a quicker onset time, and is more efficacious. STUDY DESIGN: The design was a single-center double-blinded randomized control trial, set in an outpatient oral and maxillofacial clinic housed in the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. Inclusion criteria for the study were patients requiring a single tooth extraction due either to caries or periodontal disease. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The predictor variable was the local anesthetic used either nonbuffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (control) or bicarbonate buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (study) was randomly assigned. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES: Primary outcome variables were injection pain score, and postoperative pain, time to anesthetic onset, and the number of rounds of injections required to achieve adequate anesthesia. COVARIATES: The covariates were jaw involved, age, sex, and race, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, current tobacco use, history of psychiatric illness, chronic pain, and preoperative pain score. ANALYSES: Test statistics were calculated using Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Spearman rank correlation test, χ2 test for bivariate analyses, and Fisher's exact test. P values ≤ .05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The final sample was 114 subjects. The mean age of the sample was 42.97 years, standard deviation ±13.43 years. The sample was 39.47% male. The racial demographics were Caucasian (62.28%) and African American (33.33%). Buffered lidocaine did not have a statistically significant relationship with any of the outcomes. The jaw involved had a statistically significant association to the injection pain score (P value = .006), and the number of rounds of anesthetic required (P value = .047). Age showed a statistically significant association to injection pain score (P value = .032), and the number of rounds of anesthetic required (P value = .027). Finally, preoperative pain had a statistically significant relationship with injection pain score (P value = < .001). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In this study, bicarbonate buffered lidocaine did not exhibit any discernible advantages over nonbuffered lidocaine for any study outcomes.

Moving from research to clinical care: Building therapist capacity to deliver the teen online problem-solving program for acquired brain injuries in adolescence.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the training process for teen online problem solving (TOPS) for acquired brain injury (ABI) in adolescence. We evaluated feedback from training participants and therapists delivering the intervention to assess facilitators and barriers to adoption into clinical practice. METHOD: Therapist trainings took place between February 2020 and December 2021 and were primarily virtual due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We surveyed 190 trainees and 27 active therapists regarding their experiences with the training process and with delivering the intervention to families, respectively. Descriptive statistics were reported for Likert scale items. Open-ended survey responses were summarized using inductive thematic analysis by two independent coders, and themes were compared by profession. RESULTS: The majority of trainees reported that they felt comfortable or very confident using the TOPS intervention with patients following the training. Trainees reported that they benefited from clinician-centered and applied training components. Active therapists identified facilitators to TOPS implementation including the family-based therapeutic approach, virtual format, and the broad generalizability of the problem-solving framework. Barriers to implementation included low family engagement, comorbid mental health or language difficulties, and external family stressors. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation process for TOPS highlights the importance of and challenges to the dissemination of psychosocial interventions. As pediatric ABI remains an underserved population within behavioral health, future implementation work should address barriers in integrating evidence-based therapies within clinical practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).