Suppr超能文献

使用Wand或传统注射器进行上牙槽前中神经阻滞注射时的注射痛及注射后疼痛。

Injection pain and postinjection pain of the anterior middle superior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conventional syringe.

作者信息

Nusstein John, Lee Shelly, Reader Al, Beck Mike, Weaver Joel

机构信息

Department of Endodontics, College of Dentistry, Ohio State University, PO Box 182357, Columbus, OH 43218-2357, USA.

出版信息

Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004 Jul;98(1):124-31. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2004.02.064.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to compare the pain of injection and post-injection pain of the AMSA injection using the computer-assisted Wand Plus injection system versus a conventional syringe.

STUDY DESIGN

Using a crossover design, 40 subjects randomly received 2 blinded AMSA injections using the Wand Plus system and a conventional syringe, at 2 separate appointments. The AMSA injection site was centered halfway between the midpalatine raphe and gingival margin of the first and second premolars. The pain of needle insertion, anesthetic solution deposition pain, and postinjection pain were recorded on a Heft-Parker VAS for the 2 AMSA injections.

RESULTS

For needle insertion, 38% of the subjects had moderate/severe pain with the Wand Plus((R)) and 34% moderate/severe pain with the conventional syringe, with no significant difference between techniques. There was a significant difference for solution deposition pain, with the conventional syringe causing more moderate/severe pain (42% conventional vs. 25% for the Wand Plus. Regarding postinjection pain, after numbness wore off there was no significant difference between the Wand Plus injection technique (0% moderate pain) and the conventional syringe technique (8% moderate pain). Postinjection, approximately 8% to 10% of the subjects experienced slight palatal swelling and 2% experienced temporary numbness. These problems resolved quickly and were considered minor.

CONCLUSIONS

The AMSA injection, using the Wand Plus, resulted in similar pain ratings for needle insertion as the conventional syringe but statistically lower pain ratings upon anesthetic solution deposition. However, the AMSA, using either the Wand Plus or a conventional syringe, has the potential to be a painful injection. We found the incidence of postinjection pain and sequelae was low with both techniques.

摘要

目的

本前瞻性、随机、双盲研究旨在比较使用计算机辅助Wand Plus注射系统与传统注射器进行AMSA注射时的注射疼痛及注射后疼痛。

研究设计

采用交叉设计,40名受试者在两次单独的就诊中,随机接受使用Wand Plus系统和传统注射器进行的2次双盲AMSA注射。AMSA注射部位位于腭中缝与第一和第二前磨牙牙龈边缘之间的中点。在Heft-Parker视觉模拟量表上记录2次AMSA注射的进针疼痛、麻醉剂溶液注射疼痛及注射后疼痛。

结果

进针时,38%的受试者使用Wand Plus时出现中度/重度疼痛,34%使用传统注射器时出现中度/重度疼痛,两种技术之间无显著差异。溶液注射疼痛存在显著差异,传统注射器导致更多的中度/重度疼痛(传统注射器为42%,Wand Plus为25%)。关于注射后疼痛,麻木消退后,Wand Plus注射技术(0%中度疼痛)与传统注射器技术(8%中度疼痛)之间无显著差异。注射后,约8%至10%的受试者出现轻微腭部肿胀,2%的受试者出现暂时性麻木。这些问题很快得到解决,被认为是轻微的。

结论

使用Wand Plus进行AMSA注射时,进针疼痛评分与传统注射器相似,但在麻醉剂溶液注射时疼痛评分在统计学上较低。然而,使用Wand Plus或传统注射器进行AMSA注射都有可能带来疼痛。我们发现两种技术的注射后疼痛及后遗症发生率都较低。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验