Effect of vibration during local anesthesia administration on pain, anxiety, and behavior of pediatric patients aged 6-11 years: A crossover split-mouth study.
Behavior
Distraction
Local Anesthesia
Pain
Pediatric Dentistry
Vibration
Journal
Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine
ISSN: 2383-9309
Titre abrégé: J Dent Anesth Pain Med
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101690691
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Jun 2019
Historique:
received:
08
02
2019
revised:
07
05
2019
accepted:
17
06
2019
entrez:
25
7
2019
pubmed:
25
7
2019
medline:
25
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Uncooperative behavior of children due to dental anxiety may interfere with the effective delivery of dental care and compromise the quality of treatment provided. Injection of local anesthesia is one of the most anxiety-inducing stimuli in pediatric dentistry. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a child-friendly device, having a combined effect of vibration and distraction, with the conventional method of injection on pain, anxiety, and behavior of pediatric patients aged 6-11 years. This randomized, crossover, split-mouth study included 30 children requiring a bilateral inferior alveolar nerve block. The children were equally divided into two groups: group 1, aged 6-8 and group 2, aged 9-11 years. All children were injected with anesthesia using the conventional and device method in two separate sessions. They were assessed for anxiety by measuring the pulse rate before and during the administration of local anesthesia. Behavior was assessed using Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale, and the child's experience while receiving anesthesia was assessed using the Wong Bakers Pain Rating Scale. Results showed that the children who received local anesthesia using the device method had a lower mean pulse rate, FLACC scores, and pain rating scores than those who received local anesthesia using the conventional method. The device method was more effective than the conventional method in managing pain, anxiety, and behavior of patients aged 6-11 years. The device is a cost effective, simple, and child-friendly product for administrating local anesthesia in pediatric patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Uncooperative behavior of children due to dental anxiety may interfere with the effective delivery of dental care and compromise the quality of treatment provided. Injection of local anesthesia is one of the most anxiety-inducing stimuli in pediatric dentistry. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a child-friendly device, having a combined effect of vibration and distraction, with the conventional method of injection on pain, anxiety, and behavior of pediatric patients aged 6-11 years.
METHODS
METHODS
This randomized, crossover, split-mouth study included 30 children requiring a bilateral inferior alveolar nerve block. The children were equally divided into two groups: group 1, aged 6-8 and group 2, aged 9-11 years. All children were injected with anesthesia using the conventional and device method in two separate sessions. They were assessed for anxiety by measuring the pulse rate before and during the administration of local anesthesia. Behavior was assessed using Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale, and the child's experience while receiving anesthesia was assessed using the Wong Bakers Pain Rating Scale.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Results showed that the children who received local anesthesia using the device method had a lower mean pulse rate, FLACC scores, and pain rating scores than those who received local anesthesia using the conventional method.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The device method was more effective than the conventional method in managing pain, anxiety, and behavior of patients aged 6-11 years. The device is a cost effective, simple, and child-friendly product for administrating local anesthesia in pediatric patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31338420
doi: 10.17245/jdapm.2019.19.3.143
pmc: PMC6620534
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
143-149Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS: The authors declare that they have no financial or competing interests.
Références
Int J Paediatr Dent. 2000 Jun;10(2):126-32
pubmed: 11310097
Paediatr Drugs. 2005;7(1):41-54
pubmed: 15777110
Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2005 Mar;6(1):30-4
pubmed: 15839831
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008 Sep 01;9(6):33-40
pubmed: 18784857
Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2015 Feb;16(1):43-50
pubmed: 25256207
Clin J Pain. 2016 Jan;32(1):82-6
pubmed: 25724021
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2015 Jul-Sep;33(3):173-6
pubmed: 26156269
J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Dec;9(12):ZC05-9
pubmed: 26816984
J Adv Res. 2016 May;7(3):551-6
pubmed: 27222759
Pain Res Manag. 2017;2017:1434015
pubmed: 28490941
Anesth Essays Res. 2017 Apr-Jun;11(2):431-438
pubmed: 28663636
J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2018 Feb;18(1):35-40
pubmed: 29556557
Pediatr Nurs. 1988 Jan-Feb;14(1):9-17
pubmed: 3344163
Pediatr Nurs. 1997 May-Jun;23(3):293-7
pubmed: 9220806
Am J Emerg Med. 1998 Jul;16(4):353-6
pubmed: 9672449