Journal of Conservative Dentistry

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year
: 2014  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 169--174

Comparison of acceptance, preference and efficacy between pressure anesthesia and classical needle infiltration anesthesia for dental restorative procedures in adult patients


Chetana Sachin Makade, Pratima R Shenoi, Mohit K Gunwal 
 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, VSPM's Dental College & Research Centre, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Chetana Sachin Makade
Associate Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics VSPM«SQ»s Dental College and Research Centre, Digdoh Hills, Hingna Road, Nagpur - 440 019, Maharashtra
India

Introduction: Intraoral local anesthesia is essential for delivering dental care. Needless devices have been developed to provide anesthesia without injections. Little controlled research is available on its use in dental restorative procedures in adult patients. The aims of this study were to compare adult patients acceptability and preference for needleless jet injection with classical local infiltration as well as to evaluate the efficacy of the needleless anesthesia. Materials and Methods: Twenty non fearful adults with no previous experience of dental anesthesia were studied using split-mouth design. The first procedure was performed with classical needle infiltration anesthesia. The same amount of anesthetic solution was administered using MADA jet needleless device in a second session one week later, during which a second dental restorative procedure was performed. Patients acceptance was assessed using Universal pain assessment tool while effectiveness was recorded using soft tissue anesthesia and pulpal anesthesia. Patients reported their preference for the anesthetic method at the third visit. The data was evaluated using chi square test and student«SQ»s t-test. Results: Pressure anesthesia was more accepted and preferred by 70% of the patients than traditional needle anesthesia (20%). Both needle and pressure anesthesia was equally effective for carrying out the dental procedures. Conclusion: Patients experienced significantly less pain and fear (p<0.01) during anesthetic procedure with pressure anesthesia. However, for more invasive procedures needle anesthesia will be more effective.


How to cite this article:
Makade CS, Shenoi PR, Gunwal MK. Comparison of acceptance, preference and efficacy between pressure anesthesia and classical needle infiltration anesthesia for dental restorative procedures in adult patients.J Conserv Dent 2014;17:169-174


How to cite this URL:
Makade CS, Shenoi PR, Gunwal MK. Comparison of acceptance, preference and efficacy between pressure anesthesia and classical needle infiltration anesthesia for dental restorative procedures in adult patients. J Conserv Dent [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Sep 20 ];17:169-174
Available from: http://www.jcd.org.in/article.asp?issn=0972-0707;year=2014;volume=17;issue=2;spage=169;epage=174;aulast=Makade;type=0