Painful perception in the use of computed anesthesia in Pediatric Dentistry
integrative literature review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35699/2178-1990.2022.36740Keywords:
Dental anesthesia, Local anesthesia, Dental anxiety, Behavior control, Pediatric dentistryAbstract
Aim: To review the literature on the efficiency of computerized local anesthesia systems (AC) in Pediatric Dentistry, considering the patient’s pain perception.
Methods: Based on the guiding question “Is the computerized anesthesia system effective in reducing pain perception in children’s dental care?”, in December 2021, a search was performed on the PubMed database, following an established protocol, filtering free clinical trial articles. The selection of studies was carried out independently by two researchers, in two phases: first, reading the titles and abstracts, and second, obtaining and reading the full articles. The selected studies were analyzed for methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP).
Results: Among the articles that met the eligibility criteria (n = 14), 10 were of the split-mouth type. A total of 984 children participated in the surveys, aged 2 to 15 years (mean = 8.5 years). The Wand system (Milestone Scientific Inc., USA) was the most frequently used (57.14%; n = 8). The most used scales to analyze the pain perception of children were the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Sound, Eyes, Movement Scale (SEM), before anesthesia, during needle insertion, and during and after anesthetic injection.
Conclusion: Although some studies have shown a reduction in VAS scores and heart rate for CA in pediatric dentistry, it is not possible to accurately judge whether the device is effective, given the lack of uniformity in the methodology used in the surveys.
References
Merskey H, Bogduk N. [Internet]. International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) Terminology. 1979. [acesso em 05 dez 2020]. Disponível em: https://www.iasp-pain.org/Education/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=1698#Pain.
Ghanei M, Arnrup K, Robertson A. Procedural pain in routine dental care for children: a part of the Swedish BITA study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2018;19(5):365-72.
Mittal M, Chopra R, Kumar A, Srivastava D. Comparison of pain perception using conventional versus computer-controlled intraligamentary local anesthetic injection for extraction of primary molars. Anesth Prog. 2019;66(2):69-76.
Garret-Bernardin A, Cantile T, D’Antò V, Galanakis A, Fauxpoint G, Ferrazzano GF, et al. Pain experience and behavior management in pediatric dentistry: a comparison between traditional local anesthesia and the Wand computerized delivery system. Pain Res Manag. 2017;2017:7941238.
Kumar MP. Newer delivery systems for local anesthesia in dentistry. J Pharm Sci Res. 2015;7(5):252-5.
Mittal M, Kumar A, Srivastava D, Sharma P, Sharma S. Pain perception: computerized versus traditional local anesthesia in pediatric patients. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2015;39(5):470-4.
Ram D, Peretz B. The assessment of pain sensation during local anesthesia using a computerized local anesthesia (Wand) and a conventional syringe. J Dent Child (Chic). 2003;70(2):130-3.
Munshi AK, Hegde A, Bashir N. Clinical evaluation of the efficacy of anesthesia and patient preference using the needle-less jet syringe in pediatric dental practice. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2001;25(2):131–6.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:71.
CASP - Critical Appraisal Skills Programme [Internet]. CASP (randomised controlled trial checklist. 2020. Disponível em: https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CASP-Randomised-Controlled-Trial-Checklist-2018_fillable_form.pdf. Acesso em 10 de Julho de 2020.
Smolarek PC, Silva LS, Martins PRD, Hartman KC, Bortoluzzi MC, Chibinski ACR. The influence of distinct techniques of local dental anesthesia in 9 to 12-year-old children: randomized clinical trial on pain and anxiety. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(6):3831-43.
Smaïl-Faugeron V, Muller-Bolla M, Sixou JL, Courson F. Evaluation of intraosseous computerized injection system (QuickSleeper™) vs conventional infiltration anaesthesia in paediatric oral health care: A multicentre, single-blind, combined split-mouth and parallel-arm randomized controlled trial. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2019;29(5):573-84.
Langthasa M, Yeluri R, Jain AA, Munshi AK. Comparison of the pain perception in children using comfort control syringe and a conventional injection technique during pediatric dental procedures. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2012;30(4):323-8.
Arapostathis KN, Dabarakis NN, Coolidge T, Tsirlis A, Kotsanos N. Comparison of acceptance, preference, and efficacy between jet injection INJEX and local infiltration anesthesia in 6 to 11 year old dental patients. Anesth Prog. 2010;57(1):3-12.
Feda M, Al Amoudi N, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N, Masoud I, et al. A comparative study of children’s pain reactions and perceptions to AMSA injection using CCLAD versus traditional injections. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2010;34(3):217-22.
Kuscu OO, Akyuz S. Is it the injection device or the anxiety experienced that causes pain during dental local anaesthesia? Int J Paediatr Dent. 2008;18(2):139-45.
Allen KD, Kotil D, Larzelere RE, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S. Comparison of a computerized anesthesia device with a traditional syringe in preschool children. Pediatr Dent. 2002;24(4):315-20.
Gibson RS, Allen K, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S. The Wand vs. traditional injection: a comparison of pain related behaviors. Pediatr Dent. 2000;22(6):458-62.
Asarch T, Allen K, Petersen B, Beiraghi S. Efficacy of a computerized local anesthesia device in pediatric dentistry. Pediatr Dent. 1999;21(7):421-4.
Baghdadi ZD. Evaluation of electronic dental anesthesia in children. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88(4):418-23.
Cho SY, Drummond BK, Anderson MH, Williams S. Effectiveness of electronic dental anesthesia for restorative care in children. Pediatr Dent. 1998;20(2):105-11.
NCBI Resource Coordinators. Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nucleic Acids Res; 44(1):7-19.
Silva RLD, Medeiros DM, Fattah T, Conceição RS, Trombetta AP, Panata L, et al. Avaliação da dor durante o cateterismo por via transradial utilizando escala visual analógica. Rev Bras Cardiol Invasiva. 2015;23(3):207-10.
Correia LL, Linhares MBM. Avaliação do comportamento de crianças em situações de dor: revisão da literatura. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2008;84(6):477-86.
