The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 135, No 3, 358-365.
© 2004 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by LOOMER, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by PERRY, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by LOOMER, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by PERRY, D. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Pharmacology

ADVANCES IN DENTAL PRODUCTS

Computer-controlled delivery versus syringe delivery of local anesthetic injections for therapeutic scaling and root planing



PETER M. LOOMER, D.D.S., Ph.D. and DOROTHY A. PERRY, Ph.D.

Background. The authors conducted a study to compare administration of local anesthetic using a computer-controlled delivery device with an aspirating syringe for therapeutic scaling and root planing. The anterior middle superior alveolar, or AMSA, injection was compared with other maxillary injections.

Methods. Twenty healthy adults with moderate periodontal disease participated in this single-blind crossover study. Subjects were evaluated by a trained examiner and were treated by experienced dental hygienists. Subjects provided written and verbal pain ratings via a visual analog scale, or VAS, and a verbal rating scale, or VRS. AMSA injections were compared with syringe-delivered injections—greater palatine, or GP, and nasopalatine, or NP, blocks, and anterior superior alveolar and middle superior alveolar injections—in maxillary quadrants. Bleeding and changes in attachment were evaluated after one month.

Results. VAS and VRS scores for AMSA were significantly lower for computer-controlled delivery when compared with NP injections and combined maxillary injections (VAS scores) and with GP and combined maxillary injections (VRS scores). Mean injection times were similar for both groups. Mean gains in attachment were equal, 0.19 millimeters for quadrants anesthetized using computer-controlled injections and 0.22 mm for syringe injections.

Conclusions. Subjects reported having less pain with GP and NP injections delivered using the computer-controlled device, and total injection time was similar to that required for syringe injections. Both techniques provided adequate anesthesia for therapeutic scaling and root planing.

Clinical Implications. The two anesthetic delivery techniques were therapeutically equivalent for mandibular injections, and the AMSA injection has clinically significant advantages for maxillary injections.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-2004 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.