Pain Perception: Computerized versus Traditional Local Anesthesia in Pediatric Patients

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.

1. Yesilyurt C, Bulut G, Taşdemir T. Pain perception during inferior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conventional syringe. Br Dent J. Sep 13; 205 (5):E10; discussion 258-9. 2008.

2. Versloot J, Veerkamp JSJ, Hoogstraten J. Computerized anaesthesia delivery system vs. traditional syringe: comparing pain and pain related behaviour in children. Eur J Oral Sci.; 113:488-493. 2005.

3. Lopez ALSM, Esparza LDG, Delgadillo GT, Moscoso AG, Sierra JFH, Guillen AJP. Clinical comparison of pain perception rates between computerized local anaesthesia and conventional syringe in paediatric patients. J Clin Pediatr Dent.; 29(3):239-243. 2005.

4. Ram D and Peretz B. Administering local anaesthesia to paediatric patientscurrent status and prospects for the future. Int J Paed Dent; 12: 80-89. 2002.

5. Ashkenazi M, Blumer S, Eli I. Effectiveness of various modes of computerized delivery of local anaesthesia in primary maxillary molars. Pediatr Dent; 28:29-38. 2006.

6. Lee S, Reader Al, Nusstein J, Beck M and Weaver J. Anaesthetic efficacy of the anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) injection. Anesth Prog.; 51: 80-89. 2004.

7. Yenisey M. Comparison of the pain levels of computer controlled and conventional anaesthesia techniques in prosthodontic treatment. J Appl Oral Sci.;17(5): 14-20. 2009.

8. Susi L, Reader Al, Nusstein J, Beck M, Weaver J & Drum M. Heart rate effects of intraosseous injections using slow and fast rates of anaesthetic solution deposition. Anesth Prog.; 55(1):9-15. 2008.

9. Nicholson JW, Berry TG, Summitt JB, Yuan CH, Witten TM. Pain perception and utility: a comparison of the syringe and computerized local injection techniques. Gen Dent; 49(2):167-173. 2001.

10. Nusstein J, Lee S, Reader Al, Beck M & Weaver J. Injection pain and postinjection pain of the anterior middle superior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conventional syringe. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod.; 98:124-131. 2004.

11. Hochman M, Chiarello D, Hochman CB, Lopatkin R and Pergola S. Computerized local anaesthetic delivery vs. traditional syringe technique. Subjective pain response. NY State Dent J.; 63(7):24-29. 1997.

12. Malamad SF. Handbook of local anaesthesia, St. Louis, Mosby, Edition 5, 2010; pg 224.

13. Wright GZ, Weinberger SJ, Marti R and Plotzke O. The effectiveness of infiltration anaesthesia in the mandibular primary molar region. Pediatr Dent.;13 (5):278-283. 1991.

14. Sixou JL, Marie-Cousin A, Huet A, Hingant B & Robert JC. Pain assessment by children and adolescents during intraosseous anaesthesia using a computerized system (Quick Sleeper). Int J Paed Dent; 19: 360-366. 2009.

15. Frankl SN, Shiere FR & Fogels HR. Should the parent remain with the child in the dental operatory? J Dent Child.; 29:150. 1962.

16. Amoudi NA, Feda M, Sharaf A, Hanno A & Farsi N. Assessment of the anaesthetic effectiveness of anterior and middle superior alveolar injection using a computerized device versus traditional technique in children. J Clin Pediatr Dent.; 33(2):11-16. 2008.

17. Nakai Y, Milgrom P, Coldwell S, Domoto P, Ramsay D. Effectiveness of local anaesthesia in paediatric dental practice. J Am Dent Assoc.; 131(12):1699-1705. 2000.

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

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

20. Ran D and Peretz B. Assessing the pain reaction of children receiving periodontal ligament anesthesia using a computerized device (Wand). J Clin Pediatr Dent.; 27(3):247-250. 2003.

21. Versloot J, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J. Pain behaviour and distress in children during two sequential dental visits: comparing a computerised anaesthesia delivery system and a traditional syringe. Br Dent J. Jul 12; 205(1):E2; discussion 30-1. Epub 2008 May 23. 2008.

22. Ram D & Peretz B. The assessment of pain sensation during local anaesthesia using a computerized local anaesthesia (Wand) and a conventional syringe. J Dent Child (Chic).; 70(2):130-133. 2003.

23. Primosch RE & Brooks R. Influence of anaesthetic flow rate delivered by the Wand local anaesthetic system on pain response to palatal injections. Am J Dent.; 15(1):15-20. 2002.

24. Tahmassebi JF, Nikolaou M, Duggal MS. 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. 2009.