scholarly journals Behavioral response and pain perception to computer controlled local anesthetic delivery system and cartridge syringe

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 223 ◽  
Author(s):  
JBaby John ◽  
Sharath Asokan ◽  
PR Geetha Priya ◽  
R Punithavathy ◽  
V Praburajan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Delivery System ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Behavioral Response ◽  
Pain Perception ◽  
Computer Controlled

scholarly journals Assessment of computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system for pain control during restorative procedures: A randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-304
Author(s):  
Hrishikesh Saoji ◽  
Mohan Thomas Nainan ◽  
Naveen Nanjappa ◽  
Mahesh Ravindra Khairnar ◽  
Meeta Hishikar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
Delivery System ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Pain Perception ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Conventional Group ◽  
Lower Pain ◽  
Computer Controlled ◽  
Recovery From Anesthesia ◽  
Time Required

Background. Local anesthesia is given to decrease pain perception during dental treatments, but it may itself be a reason for pain and aggravate the dental fear. Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS) is one of the alternatives for decreasing the patients’ pain during local anesthesia. This study compared the time required for the recovery from anesthesia, pain/discomfort during injection and pain/discomfort 24 hours after administering local anesthesia with CCLADS, a standard self-aspirating syringe and a conventional disposable 2-mL syringe. Methods. The study was conducted on 90 subjects (an age group of 20-40 years), who suffered from sensitivity during cavity preparation. They were randomly divided into three groups of 30 individuals each to receive intraligamentary anesthesia (2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline) using either of the three techniques: CCLADS, a standard self-aspirating syringe, or a conventional disposable 2-mL syringe. The onset of anesthesia, time required for recovery from anesthesia (in minutes), pain/discomfort during injection and pain/discomfort 24 hours after administering local anesthesia were recorded. Results. The time required for the onset of anesthesia and recovery from anesthesia was shorter with CCLADS (4.83±2.31 and 34.2±1.895, respectively) as compared to the standard self-aspirating group (10.83±1.90 and 43.5±7.581, respectively) and the conventional group (11.00±2.03 and 43.5±6.453, respectively) (P<0.001). The patients in the CCLADS group experienced no pain during local anesthesia administration as compared to the patients in the self-aspirating and conventional groups. The CCLADS and self-aspirating groups showed lower pain response as compared to the conventional group for pain after 24 hours. Conclusion. CCLADS can be an effective and pain-free alternative to conventional local anesthetic procedures.

scholarly journals Comparison of Pain Perception Using Conventional Versus Computer-Controlled Intraligamentary Local Anesthetic Injection for Extraction of Primary Molars

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-76
Author(s):  
Meenu Mittal ◽  
Radhika Chopra ◽  
Ashok Kumar ◽  
Dhirendra Srivastava
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Conventional Method ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Pain Perception ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Pain Scale ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Primary Molar ◽  
Alternative Means ◽  
Computer Controlled

This study was conducted to compare pain perception of intraligamentary anesthesia (ILA) using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS) versus a conventional intraligamentary injection for extraction of primary molars. A randomized controlled trial was designed where 82 children requiring 102 primary molar extractions were given ILA of 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine with either the conventional method or a CCLADS. Pain during injection and extraction was assessed using the Sound, Eye, Motor (SEM) scale and heart rate recording. Faces Pain Scale–Revised (FPS) scores were self-reported by patients. The Mann-Whitney test was used for evaluation of FPS and SEM scores and Student's t test for evaluation of heart rate readings. Heart rate values during injection were found to be higher, but not statistically significantly higher (p = .077), for conventional injection versus CCLADS; however, heart rate values during extraction were significantly higher for the conventional method (p = .009). Both FPS and SEM values were found to be significantly higher for conventional ILA technique (p &lt; .05). ILA can be an effective alternative means of anesthesia for primary molar extractions, and CCLADS devices can make ILA more effective and less painful.

scholarly journals Comparison of the Pain Perception of Conventional and Computer-controlled Anesthesia Techniques for Extraction of Maxillary First Premolar

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-153
Author(s):  
Varsha Sunil Manekar
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Pain Perception ◽  
Central Incisor ◽  
Analog Scale ◽  
Computer Controlled ◽  
Single Blind

ABSTRACT Introduction Anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) block is a nerve block technique in conjunction with computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) system. Anterior middle superior alveolar produces local anesthesia (LA) to the maxillary teeth from second premolar to the central incisor including the hard palate and corresponding soft-tissue of both buccal and palatal side, with single palatal injection. Aim To evaluate efficacy of AMSA block for extraction of maxillary first premolar. Study design In randomized single blind, split mouth clinical trial, the 14 patients received the conventional buccal-palatal (B-P) anesthesia on one side and CCLAD anesthesia AMSA for other side. The treatment consisted of bilateral extraction of maxillary first premolars for orthodontics. Pain perception ratings were obtained by using 10 point visual analog scale (VAS). Results A total of 100% cases had painless injection with CCLAD, whereas 28.57% patients had painless injection experience with conventional LA. In all cases, there was no pain during extraction on both sides. With CCLAD, buccal retraction was painful in four cases whereas palatal retraction was painful in one case. Conclusion Anterior middle superior alveolar block injected with CCLAD is better as LA technique for extraction of maxillary first premolar as compared to B-P approach. How to cite this article Manekar VS. Comparison of the Pain Perception of Conventional and Computer-controlled Anesthesia Techniques for Extraction of Maxillary First Premolar. World J Dent 2015;6(3):150-153.

Assessment of the Anesthetic Effectiveness of Anterior and Middle Superior Alveolar injection Using a Computerized Device versus Traditional Technique in Children

2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Najlaa Al Amoudi ◽  
May Feda ◽  
Aly Sharaf ◽  
Azza Hanno ◽  
Najat Farsi
Keyword(s):  
Delivery System ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Anesthetic Techniques ◽  
Traditional Technique ◽  
Maxillary Molars ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Computer Controlled ◽  
Single Blind

The study aims to evaluate the anesthetic effectiveness of the Anterior and Middle Superior Alveolar (AMSA)injection administered through a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD), and compare it with the traditional buccal and palatal injections used to anesthetize maxillary primary molars.Materials and methods: the sample included 80 primary maxillary molars, divided into 2 equal groups:Pulpotomy and extraction groups. Each group was divided equally into 4 subgroups: A. First molars anesthetized with the traditional technique, B. first molars anesthetized with the CCLAD, C. second molars anesthetized with the traditional technique, and D. second molars anesthetized with the CCLAD. The evaluation was done single blind using SEM scale. Results: the AMSA injection with the CCLAD was found to be effective in anesthetizing maxillary primary molars in pulpotomy and extraction procedures. There was no significant difference between the two anesthetic techniques except in the step of gingival retraction buccally in, which the traditional injections were more effective than the CCLAD during extractions. No significant difference was found between first and second primary molars in the effectiveness of both techniques. Conclusion:the AMSA injection using CCLAD was found to be effective in children.

Pain Perception: Computerized versus Traditional Local Anesthesia in Pediatric Patients

2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 470-474 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Mittal ◽  
A Kumar ◽  
D Srivastava ◽  
P Sharma ◽  
S Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Pain Perception ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Computerized Method ◽  
Local Anesthetic Injection ◽  
Computerized System ◽  
Buccal Infiltration

Background: Local anesthetic injection is one of the most anxiety- provoking procedure for both children and adult patients in dentistry. A computerized system for slow delivery of local anesthetic has been developed as a possible solution to reduce the pain related to the local anesthetic injection. Study design: The present study was conducted to evaluate and compare pain perception rates in pediatric patients with computerized system and traditional methods, both objectively and subjectively. Study design: It was a randomized controlled study in one hundred children aged 8-12 years in healthy physical and mental state, assessed as being cooperative, requiring extraction of maxillary primary molars. Children were divided into two groups by random sampling - Group A received buccal and palatal infiltration injection using Wand, while Group B received buccal and palatal infiltration using traditional syringe. Visual Analog scale (VAS) was used for subjective evaluation of pain perception by patient. Sound, Eye, Motor (SEM) scale was used as an objective method where sound, eye and motor reactions of patient were observed and heart rate measurement using pulse oximeter was used as the physiological parameter for objective evaluation. Results: Patients experienced significantly less pain of injection with the computerized method during palatal infiltration, while less pain was not statistically significant during buccal infiltration. Heart rate increased during both buccal and palatal infiltration in traditional and computerized local anesthesia, but difference between traditional and computerized method was not statistically significant. Conclusion: It was concluded that pain perception was significantly more during traditional palatal infiltration injection as compared to computerized palatal infiltration, while there was no difference in pain perception during buccal infiltration in both the groups

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document