Tirupathi Sunny Priyatham, Rajasekhar Srinitya, Tummakomma Pushpalatha, Gangili Aishwarya Arya, Khan Abdul Rehman Ahmed, Khurramuddin Mohammed, Purumandla Usha
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Malla Reddy Institute of Dental Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India, e-mail:
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Malla Reddy Institute of Dental Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020 Jun 1;21(6):604-608.
This study aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy of auto-control syringe (ACS) and insulin syringe (IS) for palatal local anesthesia administration in children.
The study was a double-blind, randomized, and crossover trial, comprising 80 children requiring palatal anesthesia bilaterally (total 160 injections). Palatal anesthesia on one side was delivered with ACS in one appointment and contralaterally with IS in the second appointment. One-week washout period was given between first and second appointments. Each child acted as his own control. Each injection technique subjective and objective pain scores were measured twice (during needle prick and during actual deposition of local anesthesia). Subjective and objective evaluation of pain was measured with Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale (WB-FPS) and the face, leg, activity, cry, and consolability scale (FLACC), respectively. After concluding second appointment, child was asked about their preference between both ACS and IS. Statistical evaluation was performed using Chi-square test.
Child reported less pain score for needle prick with IS as opposed to ACS ( value = 0.000416). There was no significant difference between dentist-reported pain scores between any group for both needle prick and local anesthesia administration. There is no significant difference between child reported pain score during administration of local anesthesia between two groups. Irrespective of pain scores, most of the children (96.5%) preferred IS.
For palatal local anesthesia administration in children, both IS and auto-controlled syringe have similar efficacy.
Insulin syringe can serve as an economical alternative to the expensive auto-controlled syringe for palatal injections in children.
本研究旨在评估和比较自控注射器(ACS)和胰岛素注射器(IS)在儿童腭部局部麻醉给药中的疗效。
本研究为双盲、随机、交叉试验,纳入80例双侧需要腭部麻醉的儿童(共160次注射)。一侧腭部麻醉在一次就诊时用ACS给药,对侧在第二次就诊时用IS给药。第一次和第二次就诊之间给予一周的洗脱期。每个儿童作为自身对照。每种注射技术的主观和客观疼痛评分在两次测量(针刺时和实际注射局部麻醉药时)。疼痛的主观和客观评估分别采用面部表情疼痛评分量表(WB-FPS)和面部、腿部、活动、哭闹及安慰量表(FLACC)进行测量。在第二次就诊结束后,询问儿童对ACS和IS两者的偏好。采用卡方检验进行统计学评估。
与ACS相比,儿童报告IS针刺时疼痛评分更低(值=0.000416)。在针刺和局部麻醉给药方面,任何组间牙医报告的疼痛评分均无显著差异。两组间儿童报告的局部麻醉给药期间疼痛评分无显著差异。无论疼痛评分如何,大多数儿童(96.5%)更喜欢IS。
对于儿童腭部局部麻醉给药,IS和自控注射器具有相似的疗效。
胰岛素注射器可作为儿童腭部注射时昂贵的自控注射器的经济替代方案。