HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 136, No 5, 643-651. © 2005 American Dental Association

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by ALLEN, K. L. Articles by THOMPSON, V. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by ALLEN, K. L. Articles by THOMPSON, V. P. Related Collections Dental Equipment/Instruments

Background. The authors describe a new rotary polymer instrument that selectively removes infected dentin. This instrument has the potential to prepare selected cavities without the need for local anesthesia (LA). Patient acceptance has not been investigated in a clinical trial.

Methods. In this open-label clinical study, the authors enrolled 20 subjects with two Class I carious lesions and randomly assigned them to receive one restoration with the polymer instrument and no LA and the second restoration with a carbide bur and LA. Both procedures were completed in one appointment. Subjects completed dental history, dental anxiety and situational pain questionnaires. At specific points during the procedure, subjects rated their perception of the intensity of cold, heat, pain, pressure, vibration, fear and anxiety. On completion of the restorative procedures and at 48-hour and one-week telephone contacts, subjects indicated which procedure they preferred.

Results. During treatment with the polymer instrument, subjects indicated that they experienced slightly more pain, pressure, vibration and anxiety, but not more heat, cold or fear. Immediately after the procedure, 14 (70 percent) of 20 respondents (binomial test; P = .11) said that they would prefer having no LA and use of the polymer instrument for future dental work. The number of subjects indicating this preference increased to 15 (P < .05) at both the 48-hour and one-week contacts. One subject requested rescue LA during the polymer instrument treatment.

Conclusions. A significant number of subjects preferred the rotary polymer instrumentation with no LA to the carbide bur instrumentation with LA. They held this preference despite experiencing slightly, but reliably, more pain and pressure when treated with the polymer instrument.

Clinical Implications. A polymer (bur-like) rotary instrument with cutting ability limited to infected dentin can be used in Class I cavity preparations without the need for LA.

Key Words: Caries removal; polymer instrument; local anesthesia; Class I restoration

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Van Thompson, R. G. Craig, F. A. Curro, W. S. Green, and J. A. Ship Treatment of deep carious lesions by complete excavation or partial removal: A critical review J Am Dent Assoc, June 1, 2008; 139(6): 705 - 712. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N.R.F.A. Silva, R.M. Carvalho, L.F. Pegoraro, F.R. Tay, and V.P. Thompson Evaluation of a Self-limiting Concept in Dentinal Caries Removal Journal of Dental Research, March 1, 2006; 85(3): 282 - 286. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]