Article Data

  • Views 638
  • Dowloads 149

Original Research

Open Access

Effectiveness of Two Flavored Topical Anesthetic Agents in Reducing Injection Pain in Children: A Comparative Study

  • Deepika A1
  • Chandrasekhar Rao R1
  • Vinay C1,*,
  • Uloopi KS1
  • Rao VV1

1Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Vishnu Dental College, Andhra Pradesh, India

DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.37.1.h4jl152t334j3802 Vol.37,Issue 1,January 2013 pp.15-18

Published: 01 January 2013

*Corresponding Author(s): Vinay C E-mail: vinaychandrappa@yahoo.co.in

Abstract

Topical anesthesia is widely advocated in pediatric dentistry practice to reduce pain and anxiety produced by administration of local anesthesia. There are different combinations of topical anesthetic agents that are marketed worldwide. However, sparse literature reports exist regarding clinical efficacy of these agents. Aim: To compare the clinical effectiveness of two strawberry flavored topical anesthetics viz. Precaine⁰ (8% Lidocaine + 0.8% Dibucaine) and Precaine⁰ B (20% Benzocaine) in children before intra oral local anesthetic injections and for extraction of mobile primary teeth. Study Design: This triple blind clinical study included sixty children divided equally under three techniques — palatal injections, inferior alveolar nerve block and extraction of mobile primary teeth. Both the products were used alternately using split mouth design in two visits and the child's pain response was assessed using VAS and SEM pain scale. The scores obtained were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: Precaine⁰ has shown lower mean scores in all the techniques under both the pain scales, but were statistically insignificant. Gender wise comparison has also shown lower mean scores for Precaine⁰ for both males and females, however these were statistically insignificant. On visit wise comparison, Precaine⁰ B reported significant lower scores (p<0.05) in visit 2 compared to visit 1 for inferior alveolar nerve block and extraction of mobile primary teeth under SEM pain scale. Conclusion: Precaine⁰ (8% Lidocaine + 0.8% Dibucaine) can be used as effectively as Precaine⁰ B (20% Benzocaine).

Keywords

Topical anesthesia, Lidocaine, Benzocaine, VAS: Precaine, Dibucaine

Cite and Share

Deepika A,Chandrasekhar Rao R,Vinay C,Uloopi KS,Rao VV. Effectiveness of Two Flavored Topical Anesthetic Agents in Reducing Injection Pain in Children: A Comparative Study. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2013. 37(1);15-18.

References

1. Leopold A, Wilson S, Weaver JS and Moursi AM. Pharmacokinetics of lidocaine delivered from a transmucosal patch in children. Anesth Prog, 49: 82–7, 2002.

2. Meechan  JG.  Intraoral  topical  anesthesia.  Perio  2000  J,  46:  56–79, 2008.

3. McDonald RE, Avery DR, Dean JA. Dentistry for the child and ado-lescent. 9th ed. Elsevier, New Delhi; 241–2, 2011.

4. Meechan JG. Effective topical anesthetic agents and techniques. Dent Clin N Am, 46: 759–66, 2002.

5. Martin  MD,  Ramsay  DS,  Whitney  C,  Fiset  L,  Weinstein  P.  Topical anesthesia: Differentiating the pharmacological an psychological con-tributions to efficacy. Anesth Prog, 41: 40–7, 1994.

6. Bagesund M, Tabrizi P. Lidocaine 20% patch vs lidocaine 5% gel for topical  anaesthesia  of  oral  mucosa.  Int  J  Paediatr  Dent,18:  452–60, 2008.

7. Yamamura K, Yotsuyanagi T, Okamoto T and Nabeshima T. Pain relief of oral ulcer by dibucaine-film. Pain, 83(3): 625–6, 1999.

8. Stewart  RE,  Barber TK, Troutman  KC  and Wei  SHY.  Pediatric  den-tistry- Scientific foundations and clinical practice. 1st ed. CV Mosby Company, St. Louis, 810–32, 1982.

9. Hawkins  JM,  Moore  PA.  Local  anesthesia:  advances  in  agents  and techniques. Dent Clin N Am, 46: 719–32, 2002.

10. Meechan JG. Intra-oral topical anaesthetics: a review. J Dent, 28: 3–14, 2000.

11. Paschos E, Huth KC, Benz C, Bardschmidt AR, Hickel R. Efficacy of intraoral topical anesthetics in children. J Dent, 34: 398–404, 2006.

12. Ram  D,  Peretz  B.  Reaction  of  children  to  maxillary  infiltration  and mandibular block injections. Pediatr Dent, 23: 343–6, 2001.

13. Von Baeyer CL. Children’s self-reports of pain intensity: Scale selec-tion,  limitations  and  interpretation.  Pain  Res  Management,  11(3): 157–62, 2006.

14. Giddon  DB,  Quadland  M,  Rachwall  PC,  Springer  J  and  Tursky  B. Development of a method for comparing topical anesthetics in differ-ent application and dosage forms. J Oral Ther Pharm, 4: 270–4, 1968. 

15. Peretz B, Efrat J. Dental anxiety among young adolescent patients in Israel. Int J Paediatr Dent, 10: 126–32, 2000.

16. Allin KD, Kotil D, Larzelere RE, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S. Comparison of  a  computerized  anesthesia  device  with  a  traditional  syringe  in preschool children. Pediatr Dent, 24: 315–20, 2002. 

17. Maragakis GM, Musselman RJ and Ho CC. Reaction of 5 and 6 year olds to Dental Injection after Viewing the Needle: pilot study. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 31(1): 28–31, 2006.

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.

PubMed (MEDLINE) PubMed comprises more than 35 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

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 2.0 (2022) 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