Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of distinct techniques of local dental anesthesia in 9- to 12-year-old children: randomized clinical trial on pain and anxiety

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate pain, disruptive behavior, and anxiety in children undergoing different local dental anesthetic techniques.

Methods

This randomized/parallel clinical trial analyzed three groups of patients (9–12 years old) (n = 35) who received infiltrative anesthesia using conventional (CA), vibrational (VBA), and computer-controlled techniques (CCLAD). The outcomes were pain self-perception (Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBF); Numerical Ranting Scale (NRS)), disruptive behavior (Face, Legg, Activity, Crying, Consolability Scale (FLACC)), anxiety (Corah’s Dental Anxiety Scale; modified Venham Picture test (VPTm)), and physiological parameters (systolic (SBP)/diastolic pressure (DBP); heart rate (HR); oxygen saturation (SpO2); respiratory rate (RR)). Statistical analysis was accomplished using Kruskall-Wallis test and ANOVA for repeated measures (α = 0.05).

Results

Dental anxiety levels at the baseline were similar for all patients. CA promoted less pain than VBA in WBF (p = 0.018) and NRS (p = 0.006) and CCLAD in WBF (p = 0.029). There were no differences in disruptive behavior (FLACC p = 0.573), anxiety (VPTm p = 0.474), blood pressure (SBP p = 0.954; DBP p = 0.899), heart rate (p = 0.726), oxygen saturation (p = 0.477), and respiratory rate (p = 0.930) between anesthetic techniques.

Conclusion

Conventional technique resulted in less pain perception for dental local anesthesia.

Clinical relevance

Conventional technique reduces the self-reported pain in children 9–12 years old, and therefore, the use of additional devices or different anesthetic techniques is not justified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Veneva E, Cholakova R, Raycheva R (2019) Efficacy of vibrotactile device DentalVibe in reducing injection pain and anxiety during local anaesthesia in paediatric dental patients: a study protocol for a randomised controlled clinical trial. BMJ Open 9(7):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kuscu OO, Akyuz S (2008) Is it the injection device or the anxiety experienced that causes pain during dental local anaesthesia? Int J Paediatr Dent 18(2):139–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tellez M, Potter CM, Kinner DG, Jensen D, Waldron E, Heimberg RG, Myers Virtue S, Zhao H, Ismail AI (2015) Computerized tool to manage dental anxiety: a randomized clinical trial. J Dent Res 94(9 Suppl):174–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Raslan N, Masri R (2018) A randomized clinical trial to compare pain levels during three types of oral anesthetic injections and the effect of Dentalvibe((R)) on injection pain in children. Int J Paediatr Dent 28(1):102–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Elbay M, Sermet Elbay Ü, Yildirim S, Ugurluel C, Kaya C, Baydemir C (2015) Comparison of injection pain caused by the DentalVibe Injection System versus a traditional syringe for inferior alveolar nerve block anaesthesia in paediatric patients. Eur J Paediatr Dent 16(2):123–131

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. APA (2013) American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical mannual of mental disorders. American Psychatric Association Publising, Arlington

    Google Scholar 

  7. Khan S, Hamedy R, Lei Y, Ogawa RS, White SN (2016) Anxiety related to nonsurgical root canal treatment: a systematic review. J Endod 42(12):1726–1736

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. AAPD (2015) American Academy Pediatric Dentistry. Behavior guidance for te pediatric dental patient. Pediatr Dent 37(special issue):266–280

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sriram G (2014) Advances in local anaesthesia: a paediatric overview. Indian J Dent Adv 6(3):1605–1607

    Google Scholar 

  10. Melzack R, Wall PD (1965) Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science 150(3699):971–979

  11. Ching D, Finkelman M, Loo CY (2014) Effect of the DentalVibe injection system on pain during local anesthesia injections in adolescent patients. Pediatr Dent 36(1):51–56

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dak-Albab R, Al-Monaqel MB, Koshha R, Shakhashero H, Soudan R (2016) A comparison between the effectiveness of vibration with Dentalvibe and benzocaine gel in relieving pain associated with mandibular injection: a randomized clinical trial. Anaesth Pain Intensive Care 20(1):43–49

    Google Scholar 

  13. Erdogan O, Sinsawat A, Pawa S, Rintanalert D, Vuddhakanok S (2018) Utility of vibratory stimulation for reducing intraoral injection pain. Anesth Prog 65(2):95–99

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Sermet Elbay Ü, Elbay M, Yildirim S, Kaya E, Kaya C, Ugurluel C, BaydemIr C (2016) Evaluation of the injection pain with the use of DentalVibe injection system during supraperiosteal anaesthesia in children: a randomised clinical trial. Int J Paediatr Dent 26(5):336–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grace EG, Barnes DM, Macek MD, Tatum N (2000) Patient and dentist satisfaction with a computerized local anesthetic injection system. Compend Contin Educ Dent 21(9):746–754

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Baghlaf K, Alamoudi N, Elashiry E, Farsi N, El Derwi DA, Abdullah AM (2015) The pain-related behavior and pain perception associated with computerized anesthesia in pulpotomies of mandibular primary molars: a randomized controlled trial. Quintessence Int 46(9):799–806

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Deepak V, Challa RR, Kamatham R, Nuvvula S (2017) Comparison of a new auto-controlled injection system with traditional syringe for mandibular infiltrations in children: a randomized clinical trial. Anesth Essays Res 11(2):431–438

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Mittal M, Kumar A, Srivastava D, Sharma P, Sharma S (2015) Pain perception: computerized versus traditional local anesthesia in pediatric patients. J Clin Pediatr Dent 39(5):470–474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Palm AM, Kirkegaard U, Poulsen S (2004) The wand versus traditional injection for mandibular nerve block in children and adolescents: perceived pain and time of onset. Pediatr Dent 26(6):481–484

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Versloot J, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J (2008) Pain behaviour and distress in children during two sequential dental visits: comparing a computerised anaesthesia delivery system and a traditional syringe. Br Dent J 205(1):30–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Smolarek PC, da Silva LS, Martins PRD, Hartman KC, Bortoluzzi MC, Chibinski ACR (2020) Evaluation of pain, disruptive behaviour and anxiety in children aging 5-8 years old undergoing different modalities of local anaesthetic injection for dental treatment: old undergoing different modalities of local anaesthetic injection for dental treatment: a randomised clinical trial. Acta Odontol Scand 78(6):445–453

  22. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med 8(1):18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Frankl SN, Shiere FR, Fogels HR (1962) Should the parent remain with the child in the dental operatory? J Den Child 29(1):150–163

    Google Scholar 

  24. Asarch T, Allen K, Petersen B, Beiraghi S (1999) Efficacy of a computerized local anesthesia device in pediatric dentistry. Pediatr Dent 21(7):421–425

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Walker BJPDM, Berde B (2019) Acute pain. In: Practice of anesthesia for infants and children. Elservier, Philadelphia, p 1280

    Google Scholar 

  26. Willis MH, Merkel SI, Voepel-Lewis T, Malviya S (2003) FLACC behavioral pain assessment scale: a comparison with the child’s self-report. Pediatr Nurs 29(1):195–198

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Corah NL (1969) Development of a dental anxiety scale. J Dent Res 48(4):596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Corah NL, Gale EN, Illig SJ (1978) Assessment of a dental anxiety scale. J Am Dent Assoc 97(5):816–825

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ramos-Jorge ML, Pordeus IA (2004) Por que e como medir a ansiedade infantil no ambiente odontologico. Apresentacao do Teste VPT modificado. JBP – Rev Ibero-Am Odontopediatr Odontol Bebê 7(37):282–290

    Google Scholar 

  30. Heaton LJ (2017) Self-reported Dental Anxiety is Associated With Both State Anxiety and Dental Procedure-Related Pain. J Evid Based Dent Pract 17(1):45–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Maulina T, Djustiana N, Shahib MN (2017) The Effect of Music Intervention on Dental Anxiety During Dental Extraction Procedure. Open Dent J 11(1):565–572

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Shrivastava R, Srivastava R, Shigli K, Prashanth MB, Kumaraswamy BN, Nethravathi TD (2012) Assessment of dental anxiety and its correlation with denture satisfaction in edentulous patients. J Contemp Dent Pract 13(3):257–260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Klingberg G, Broberg AG (2007) Dental fear/anxiety and dental behaviour management problems in children and adolescents: a review of prevalence and concomitant psychological factors. Int J Paediatr Dent 17(6):391–406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kent G (1985) Cognitive processes in dental anxiety. Br J Clin Psychol 24(4):259–264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Carrillo-Diaz M, Crego A, Armfield JM, Romero-Maroto M (2012) Assessing the relative efficacy of cognitive and non-cognitive factors as predictors of dental anxiety. Eur J Oral Sci 120(1):82–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Caltabiano ML, Croker F, Page L, Sklavos A, Spiteri J, Hanrahan L, Choi R (2018) Dental anxiety in patients attending a student dental clinic. BMC Oral Health 18(1):48

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Costa RSM, Ribeiro SN, Cabral ED (2012) Fatores determinantes de experiência dolorosa durante atendimento odontológico. Revista Dor 13:365–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sanikop S, Agrawal P, Patil S (2011) Relationship between dental anxiety and pain perception during scaling. J Oral Sci 53(3):341–349

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kazancioglu HO, Dahhan AS, Acar AH (2017) How could multimedia information about dental implant surgery effects patients' anxiety level? Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 22(1):102–107

    Google Scholar 

  40. Oosterink FM, de Jongh A, Aartman IH (2008) What are people afraid of during dental treatment? Anxiety-provoking capacity of 67 stimuli characteristic of the dental setting. Eur J Oral Sci 116(1):44–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Splieth CH, Bunger B, Pine C (2009) Barriers for dental treatment of primary teeth in East and West Germany. Int J Paediatr Dent 19(2):84–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Jones JE, Dean JA (2016) Local anesthesia and pain control the child and adolescent. In: McDonald and Avery's Dentistry for the child and adolescent. Elservier Health Sciences, St. Louis, p 720

    Google Scholar 

  43. Beyer JE, McGrath PJ, Berde CB (1990) Discordance between self-report and behavioral pain measures in children aged 3-7 years after surgery. J Pain Symptom Manag 5(6):350–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Julian LJ (2011) Measures of anxiety: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety (HADS-A). Arthritis Care Res 63(11):467–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Klein U, Hunzeker C, Hutfless S, Galloway A (2005) Quality of anesthesia for the maxillary primary anterior segment in pediatric patients: comparison of the P-ASA nerve block using CompuMed delivery system vs traditional supraperiosteal injections. J Dent Child (Chic) 72(3):119–125

    Google Scholar 

  46. Eli I (1992) The expirience of pain physicological aspects. Oral psychophysiology: stress, pain and behavior in dental care. CRC press, Boca Ranton, p 214

    Google Scholar 

  47. Raj S, Agarwal M, Aradhya K, Konde S, Nagakishore V (2013) Evaluation of dental fear in children during dental visit using Children's Fear Survey Schedule-Dental Subscale. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 6(1):12–17

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Belcheva A, Shindova M (2014) Subjective acceptance of pediatric patients during cavity preparation with Er:YAG laser and conventional rotary instrumental. J IMAB Ann Proc (Sci Papers) 5(1):631–633

    Google Scholar 

  49. Shilpapriya M, Jayanthi M, Reddy VN, Sakthivel R, Selvaraju G, Vijayakumar P (2015) Effectiveness of new vibration delivery system on pain associated with injection of local anesthesia in children. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 33(3):173–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kandiah P, Tahmassebi JF (2012) Comparing the onset of maxillary infiltration local anaesthesia and pain experience using the conventional technique vs. the Wand in children. Br Dent J 213(9):1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Tahmassebi JF, Nikolaou M, Duggal MS (2009) A comparison of pain and anxiety associated with the administration of maxillary local analgesia with Wand and conventional technique. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 10(2):77–82

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Thoppe-Dhamodhara YK, Asokan S, John BJ, Pollachi-Ramakrishnan G, Ramachandran P, Vilvanathan P (2015) Cartridge syringe vs computer controlled local anesthetic delivery system: Pain related behaviour over two sequential visits—a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Exp Dent 7(4):513–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Feda M, Al Amoudi N, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N, Masoud I, Almushyt A (2010) A comparative study of children's pain reactions and perceptions to AMSA injection using CCLAD versus traditional injections. J Clin Pediatr Dent 34(3):217–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Garret-Bernardin A, Cantile T, D’Antò V, Galanakis A, Fauxpoint G, Ferrazzano GF, De Rosa S, Vallogini G, Romeo U, Galeotti A (2017) Pain experience and behavior management in pediatric dentistry: a comparison between traditional local anesthesia and the wand computerized delivery system. Pain Res Manag 2017(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Oztas N, Ulusu T, Bodur H, Dogan C (2005) The wand in pulp therapy: an alternative to inferior alveolar nerve block. Quintessence Int 36(7-8):559–564

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Smolarek PC, Wambier LM, Siqueira Silva L, Chibinski ACR (2020) Does computerized anaesthesia reduce pain during local anaesthesia in paediatric patients for dental treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Paediatr Dent 30(2):118–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Al Amoudi N, Feda M, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N (2008) Assessment of the anesthetic effectiveness of anterior and middle superior alveolar injection using a computerized device versus traditional technique in children. J Clin Pediatr Dent 33(2):97–102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Allen KD, Kotil D, Larzelere RE, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S (2002) Comparison of a computerized anesthesia device with a traditional syringe in preschool children. Pediatr Dent 24(4):315–320

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Franck LS, Greenberg CS, Stevens B (2000) Pain assessment in infants and children. Pediatr Clin N Am 47(3):487–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Mischkowski D, Palacios-Barrios EE, Banker L, Dildine TC, Atlas LY (2018) Pain or nociception? Subjective experience mediates the effects of acute noxious heat on autonomic responses. Pain 159(4):699–711

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Miranda AFA, Silva LF, Caetano JÁ, Sousa AC, Almeida PC (2011) Avaliação da intensidade de dor e sinais vitais no pós-operatório de cirurgia cardíaca. Rev Escola Enfermagem USP 45(1):327–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Sikter A, Frecska E, Braun IM, Gonda X, Rihmer Z (2007) O papel da hiperventilação: a hipocapnia no patomecanismo do distúrbio de pânico. Braz J Psychiatry 29(4):375–379

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Chaudhry K, Shishodia M, Singh C, Tuli A (2015) Comparative evaluation of pain perception by vibrating needle (Vibraject™) and conventional syringe anesthesia during various dental procedures in pediatric patients: a short study. Int Dent Med J Adv Res 1(1):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  64. Patini R, Staderini E, Cantiani M, Camodeca A, Guglielmi F, Gallenzi P (2018) Dental anaesthesia for children—effects of a computer-controlled delivery system on pain and heart rate: a randomised clinical trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 56(8):744–749

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Tung J, Carillo C, Udin R, Wilson M, Tanbonliong T (2018) Clinical performance of the DentalVibe(R) injection system on pain perception during local anesthesia in children. J Dent Child (Chic) 85(2):51–57

    Google Scholar 

  66. Masaoka Y, Homma I (1999) Expiratory time determined by individual anxiety levels in humans. J Appl Physiol 86(4):1329–1336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Lopes AC, Amato Neto V, Halpern A, Fonseca AM, Chiattone CS, Quagliato EM, Baracat F, Messas GP, Junior M, Jayme A (2006) Tratado de clínica médica, 1st edn. Roca, São Paulo

    Google Scholar 

  68. Versloot J, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J (2005) Computerized anesthesia delivery system vs. traditional syringe: comparing pain and pain-related behavior in children. Eur J Oral Sci 113(6):488–493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Gibson RS, Allen K, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S (2000) The Wand vs. traditional injection: a comparison of pain related behaviors. Pediatr Dent 22(6):458–462

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Oliveira MF, Moraes MVM, Cardoso DD (2012) Avaliação da ansiedade infantil prévia ao tratamento odontológico. Publ UEPG Ci Biol Saúde 18(1):31–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Zarbock SF (2000) Pediatric pain assessment. Home Care Provid 5(5):181–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Versloot J, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten JJP (2008) Children’s self-reported pain at the dentist. Pain 137(2):389–394

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dental PostGraduate Program, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, Bloco M - Uvaranas, Paraná, Ponta Grossa, Brazil

    Priscila de Camargo Smolarek, Marcelo Carlos Bortoluzzi & Ana Cláudia Rodrigues Chibinski

  2. Dental Undergraduate Program, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, Bloco M - Uvaranas, Paraná, Ponta Grossa, Brazil

    Leonardo Siqueira da Silva, Paula Regina Dias Martins & Karen da Cruz Hartman

Authors
  1. Priscila de Camargo Smolarek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leonardo Siqueira da Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paula Regina Dias Martins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Karen da Cruz Hartman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marcelo Carlos Bortoluzzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ana Cláudia Rodrigues Chibinski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Priscila de Camargo Smolarek, Ana Cláudia Rodrigues Chibinski, and Marcelo Carlos Bortoluzzi: conceived and/or designed the work that led to the submission, acquired data, and played an important role in interpreting the results. Priscilade Camargo Smolarek, Ana Cláudia Rodrigues Chibinski, Paula Regina Dias Martins, Leonardo Siqueira da Silva, and Karen da Cruz Hartman: collected the clinical data. Priscila de Camargo Smolarek and Marcelo Carlos Bortoluzzi: executed the statistical analysis. Priscila de Camargo Smolarek and Ana Cláudia Rodrigues Chibinski: wrote the manuscript. Priscila de Camargo Smolarek, Leonardo Siqueira da Silva, Paula Regina Dias Martins, Karen da Cruz Hartman, Marcelo Carlos Bortoluzzi, and Ana Cláudia Rodrigues Chibinski: revised and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Cláudia Rodrigues Chibinski.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study that involved human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The research project was submitted to the local Ethics Committee on Investigations Involving Human Subjects and approved the protocol and issued a consent form for this study (protocol no. 1.941.369). The document that authorizes the research was submitted along with the manuscript.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all parents/guardians of the participating patients included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 36 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Camargo Smolarek, P., da Silva, L.S., Martins, P.R.D. et al. The influence of distinct techniques of local dental anesthesia in 9- to 12-year-old children: randomized clinical trial on pain and anxiety. Clin Oral Invest 25, 3831–3843 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03713-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03713-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation