Article Data

  • Views 992
  • Dowloads 176

Original Research

Open Access

A Comparative Study of Children’s Pain Reactions and Perceptions to AMSA Injection using CCLAD versus Traditional Injections

  • May Feda1
  • Najlaa Al Amoudi1,*,
  • Aly Sharaf1
  • Azza Hanno1
  • Najat Farsi1
  • Ibrahim Masoud1
  • Abdullah Almushyt1

1Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University

DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.34.3.3201l74255560520 Vol.34,Issue 3,May 2010 pp.217-222

Published: 01 May 2010

*Corresponding Author(s): Najlaa Al Amoudi E-mail: Naj_alam@yahoo.com

Abstract

Pain control is an important part of dentistry, particularly in pediatric dentistry. Recently, a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD) has been developed to reduce pain related to the local anesthetic injection. In conjunction with this technology, a new approach to the anterior and middle superior alveolar nerves (AMSA) has been induced. Studies evaluating the CCLAD in pediatric dentistry showed variable results regarding its use in pediatric dentistry. Further evaluation of this technique is needed to provide sound scientific evidence on the use of the CCLAD at this specific injection site in children. Aim:To assess children's pain reactions and pain perceptions of the AMSA injection using the CCLAD compared to the traditional buccal/palatal injections. Materials and methods: Children's pain reactions and perceptions to both techniques were measured in a group of 40 children who received both anesthetic techniques alternatively on two visits. The pain reactions were scored using the SEM scale, whereas the pain perception was evaluated by the Eland color scale. Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS version 10.0.Results: The AMSA injection delivered with the CCLAD had significantly lower mean pain reaction scores compared to traditional buccal and palatal injections. The prolonged injection time required for delivering the CCLAD injection had no negative impact on the children. The children's pain perception scores when using the CCLAD were also significantly lower compared to the traditional injection. Conclusion: The AMSA injection delivered with the CCLAD was found to be a promising device, and had significantly lower pain reaction and perception scores compared to the traditional buccal and palatal injections.

Keywords

Anesthesia, primary molars, wands, pulpotomy extraction, children

Cite and Share

May Feda,Najlaa Al Amoudi,Aly Sharaf,Azza Hanno,Najat Farsi,Ibrahim Masoud,Abdullah Almushyt. A Comparative Study of Children’s Pain Reactions and Perceptions to AMSA Injection using CCLAD versus Traditional Injections. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2010. 34(3);217-222.

References

1. Friedman M, Hochman M: The AMSA injection: A new concept for local anesthesia of maxillary teeth using a computer controlled injec-tion system. Quintessense Int, 29 (5): 297–303, 1998.

2. Asarch T, Allen KD, Peterson BS and Beiraghi S: Efficacy of a com-puterized local anesthesia device in pediatric dentistry. Pediatr Dent, 21 (7):421–24, 1999.

3. Ram C and Peretz B. The assessment of pain sensation during local anesthesia using a computerized local anesthesia (WAND) and a con-ventional syringe. J Dent Child, 70(2): 131–133, 2003.

4. Palm AM, Kirkegaard U, Poulsen S. The wand versus traditional injec-tion for mandibular nerve block in children and adolescents: Perceived pain and time onset. Pediatr Dent, 26: 481–484, 2004.

5. San Martin-Lopez A, Garrigos-Esparza L, Torre-Delgadillo G, Gordillo-Moscoso A, Hernandez-Sierra J, Pozos-Guillen A. Clinical comparison of pain perception rates between computerized local anes-thesia and conventional syringe in pediatric patients. J Clin Ped Dent, 29: 239–243, 2005.

6. Askenazi M, Blumer S, Eli I. Effectiveness of computerized delivery of intrasulcular anesthetic in primary molars. JADA,.136: 1418–1425, 2005.

7. Ashkenazi M, Blumer S, Eli I Effectiveness of various modes of com-puterized delivery of local anesthesia in primary maxillary molars. Pediatr Dent, 28(1): 29–38, 2006.

8. Ram D, Peretz B. Assessing the pain reaction of children receiving peri-odontal ligament anesthesia using a computerized device (Wand). J Clin Pediatr Dent, 27: 247–250, 2003.

9. Oztas N, Ulusu T, Bodur H, Dogan C. The Wand in pulp therapy: an alternative to inferior alveolar nerve block. Quintessense Int, 36 (7-8): 559–64, 2005.

10. Versloot J, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J. Computerized anesthesia deliv-ery system vs. traditional syringe: comparing pain and pain-related behavior in children. Eur J Oral Sci, 113(6): 488–93, 2005.

11. Ram D, Kassirer J. Assessment of a palatal approach-anterior superior alveolar (P-ASA) nerve block with the Wand in paediatric dental patients. Int J Paediatr Dent, 16(5): 348–51, 2006.

12. Gibson R, Allen K, Hutfless S and Beiraghi S: The Wand Vs. traditional injection: a comparison of pain related behaviors. Pediatric Dent, 22 (6): 458–462, 2000.

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

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

15. Milestone Scientific. The Wand: Computer controlled anesthesia deliv-ery system (manual). pp 1–27, 1998.

16. teDuits E, Goepferd S, Donly K, Pinkham J, Jakobsen J. The effective-ness of electronic dental anaesthesia in children. Pediatr Dent, 15: 191–196, 1993.

17. Hammond NI.and Full CA. Nitrous oxide analgesia and children’s per-ception of pain. Pediatr Dent, 6: 238–242, 1984.

18. Wright GZ, Weinberger SJ, Marti R and Plotzke O: The effectiveness of infiltration anesthesia in the mandibualr primary molar region. Pedi-atr Dent, 13(5): 278–283, 1991.

19. Sharaf AT: Evaluation of mandibular infiltration versus block anesthe-sia in pediatric dentistry. J Dent Child, 276–281, 1997.

20. Nakai Y, Milgrom P, Mancl L, Coldwell S, Domoto P, Ramsy D. Effec-tiveness of local anesthesia in pediatric dental practice. JADA, 131: 1699–1705, 2000.

21. Malamed SF, Handbook of local anesthesia. Local anesthetic Consid-erations in dental specialties in 5th ed: Mosby Inc, pp 274–275, 2004.

22. Roberts DH, Sowray JH. Local Analgesia in Dentistry. Anatomy in relation to local analgesia in 3rd ed: Wright, pp 78–83, 1987.

23. Kudo M. Initial injection pressure for dental local anesthesia: effects on pain and anxiety. Aneth Prog, 52(3): 95–101, 2005.

24. Revill S, Robinson J, Rosen M, Hogg M. The reliability of a linear ana-logue for evaluating pain. Anesthesia, 31: 1191–1198, 1976.

25. Shields B, Palermo T, Powers J, Grewe S, Smith G. Predictors of a child’s ability to use a visual analogue scale. Scale Care Health Dev, 29: 281–290, 2003.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 1.8 (2023) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top