Effect of a Vibration System on Pain Reduction during Injection of Dental Anesthesia in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Muhanad AlHareky, Jehan AlHumaid, Sumit Bedi, Maha El Tantawi, Mazin AlGahtani, Yousef AlYousef, Muhanad AlHareky, Jehan AlHumaid, Sumit Bedi, Maha El Tantawi, Mazin AlGahtani, Yousef AlYousef

Abstract

Background: The ''gate control" theory suggests pain can be reduced by simultaneous activation of larger diameter nerve fibers using appropriate coldness, warmth, rubbing, pressure, or vibration. This study investigated the efficacy of a device combining cold and vibration, for needle-related procedural pain in children. Methodology. A total of 51 children aged 5-12 years participated in this randomized controlled clinical trial. Half of the children were in the control group and received maxillary buccal infiltration, by injecting 1.8 ml of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 adrenaline using topical anesthesia 20% benzocaine gel for 15 seconds, while the other half were in the test group and received the same anesthesia using a commercially available external cold and a vibrating device. A face version of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used as a subjective measure to assess the child's pain experience. The parents were requested to evaluate the child's ability to tolerate pain using a behavioral/observational pain scale. Sound, Eyes, and Motor (SEM) scale and Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability (FLACC) scale were used to record the child's pain as perceived by the external evaluator. T-test or Mann-Whitney U-test was used for scale variables, paired sample T-test or Wilcoxon rank t-test was used for before and after data, and chi-square was used for categorical variable, based on the results of normality test.

Results: The results showed a statistically significant reduction in pain after the injection for the test group compared with control using VAS scale (mean = 6.68 (1.09) and 8.42 (0.50); p=0.001) and FLACC scale (mean = 5.92 (1.05) and 8.16 (0.54); p=0.002), but not when using SEM scale (mean 3.22 (0.42) and 4.24 (2.74);p=0.08).

Conclusions: Combined external cold and vibrating devices can be an effective alternative in reducing experienced pain and fear in children undergoing infiltration dental anesthesia. This study was registered with clinical trial registry of the United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03953001).

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Copyright © 2021 Muhanad AlHareky et al.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT diagram showing flow of participants.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for self-assessment of child's pain perception (score 0–10) and behavioral/observational pain scale for parent to assess the child's ability to tolerate pain (score 0–10).
Figure 3
Figure 3
SEM scale for pain assessment from child's behavior (score 0–9).
Figure 4
Figure 4
FLACC scale for pain assessment from child behavior (score 0–10).

References

    1. Second Y. L. K., Neelakantan P. Local anesthetics in dentistry newer methods of delivery. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research. 2014;6(1):4–6.
    1. Czarnecki M. L., Turner H. N., Collins P. M., Doellman D., Wrona S., Reynolds J. Procedural pain management: a position statement with clinical practice recommendations. Pain Management Nursing. 2011;12(2):95–111. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2011.02.003.
    1. Ashkenazi M., Blumer S., Eli I. Effectiveness of computerized delivery of intrasulcular anesthetic in primary molars. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2005;136(10):1418–1425. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2005.0056.
    1. Deacon B., Abramowitz J. Fear of needles and vasovagal reactions among phlebotomy patients. Journal of Anxiety Disorders. 2006;20(7):946–960. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.01.004.
    1. Sokolowski C. J., Giovannitti J. A., Boynes S. G. Needle phobia: etiology, adverse consequences, and patient management. Dental Clinics of North America. 2010;54(4):731–744. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2010.06.012.
    1. McLenon J., Rogers M. A. M. The fear of needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2019;75(1):30–42. doi: 10.1111/jan.13818.
    1. Uman L. S., Birnie K. A., Noel M., et al. Psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2013;10(10) doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005179.pub3.CD005179
    1. Whelan H. M., Kunselman A. R., Thomas N. J., Moore J., Tamburro R. F. The impact of a locally applied vibrating device on outpatient venipuncture in children. Clinical Pediatrics. 2014;53(12):1189–1195. doi: 10.1177/0009922814538494.
    1. Nanitsos E., Vartuli R., Forte A., Dennison P., Peck C. The effect of vibration on pain during local anaesthesia injections. Australian Dental Journal. 2009;54(2):94–100. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2009.01100.x.
    1. Roeber B., Wallace D. P., Rothe V., Salama F., Allen K. D. Evaluation of the effects of the VibraJect attachment on pain in children receiving local anesthesia. Pediatric Dentistry. 2011;33:46–50.
    1. Bonjar A. H. S. Syringe micro vibrator (SMV) a new device being introduced in dentistry to alleviate pain and anxiety of intraoralinjections, and a comparative study with a similar device. Archive of Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research. 2011;5:1–5.
    1. Shilpapriya M., Jayanthi M., Reddy V. N., et al. Effectiveness of new vibration delivery system on pain associated with injection of local anesthesia in children. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2015;33:173–176.
    1. Ching D., Finkelman M., Loo C. Y. Effect of the DentalVibe injection system on pain during local anesthesia injections in adolescent patients. Pediatric Dentistry. 2014;36:51–55.
    1. Ghaderi F., Banakar S., Rostami S. Effect of pre-cooling injection site on pain perception in pediatric dentistry: “A randomized clinical trial”. Dental Research Journal (Isfahan). 2013;10(6):790–794.
    1. Alanazi K. J., Pani S., AlGhanim N. Efficacy of external cold and a vibrating device in reducing discomfort of dental injections in children: a split mouth randomised crossover study. European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry. 2019;20(2):79–84. doi: 10.1007/s40368-018-0399-8.
    1. Ballard A., Khadra C., Adler S., Trottier E. D., Le May S. Efficacy of the Buzzy device for pain management during needle-related procedures. The Clinical Journal of Pain. 2019;35(6):532–543. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000690.
    1. Canbulat N., Ayhan F., Inal S. Effectiveness of external cold and vibration for procedural pain relief during peripheral intravenous cannulation in pediatric patients. Pain Management Nursing. 2015;16(1):33–39. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2014.03.003.
    1. Canbulat Ş. N., İnal S., Sevim A. A. The effect of combined stimulation of external cold and vibration during immunization on pain and anxiety levels in children. Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing. 2015;30:228–235.
    1. Habib-Agahi R., Gandjalikhan-Nassab S., Hashemipour M., Saidi A., Eskandarizadeh A. Comparing pain and pain-related behavior in children with invented telescopic dental needles. Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology. 2017;6(1):33–39.
    1. Melzack R., Wall P. D. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science. 1965;150(3699):971–978. doi: 10.1126/science.150.3699.971.
    1. Kakigi R., Shibasaki H. Mechanisms of pain relief by vibration and movement. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 1992;55(4):282–286. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.55.4.282.
    1. Nahra H., Plaghki L. Innocuous skin cooling modulates perception and neurophysiological correlates of brief CO2 laser stimuli in humans. European Journal of Pain. 2005;9(5):p. 521. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2004.11.007.
    1. Merskey H., Albe-Fessard D., Bonica J. Pain terms: a list with definitions and notes on usage. recommended by the IASP Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Pain. 1979;6(3):p. 249.
    1. Sfondrini M. F., Gandini P., Malfatto M., Di Corato F., Trovati F. Computerized casts for orthodontic purpose using powder-free intraoral scanners: accuracy, execution time, and patient feedback. BioMed Research International. 2018;2018:17. doi: 10.1155/2018/4103232.4103232
    1. Guedes C. D. C. F. V., De Freitas Filho S. A. J., De Faria P. R., Loyola A. M., Sabino-Silva R. Variation of energy in photobiomodulation for the control of radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis: a clinical study in head and neck cancer patients. International Journal of Dentistry. 2018;2018:19. doi: 10.1155/2018/4579279.4579279
    1. Stinson J. N., Kavanagh T., Yamada J., Gill N., Stevens B. Systematic review of the psychometric properties, interpretability and feasibility of self-report pain intensity measures for use in clinical trials in children and adolescents. Pain. 2006;125(1):143–157. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.05.006.
    1. Ranger M., Campbell-Yeo M. Temperament and pain response: a review of the literature. Pain Management Nursing. 2008;9(1):2–9. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2007.09.005.
    1. Cohen L. L. 1, MacLaren J. E., Fortson B. L, et al. Randomized clinical trial of distraction for infant immunization pain. Pain. 2006;125(1-2):165–171. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.05.016.
    1. Pasero C., McCaffery M. No self-report means No pain-intensity rating. AJN, American Journal of Nursing. 2005;105(10):50–53. doi: 10.1097/00000446-200510000-00032.
    1. Kazak A. E., Penati B., Waibel M. K., Blackall G. F. The Perception of Procedures Questionnaire: psychometric properties of a brief parent report measure of procedural distress. Journal of Pediatric Psychology. 1996;21(2):195–207. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/21.2.195.
    1. Chambers C. T., Craig K. D., Bennett S. M. The impact of maternal behavior on children’s pain experiences: an experimental analysis. Journal of Pediatric Psychology. 2002;27(3):293–301. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/27.3.293.
    1. Miller C., Newton S. E. Pain perception and expression: the influence of gender, personal self-efficacy, and lifespan socialization. Pain Management Nursing. 2006;7(4):148–152. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2006.09.004.
    1. Loopstra C., Strodl E., Herd D. A qualitative analysis of how parents assess acute pain in young children. Health Psychology Open. 2015;2(1) doi: 10.1177/2055102914566290.
    1. Sharma A., Suprabha B., Shenoy R., Rao A. Efficacy of lignocaine in gel and spray form during buccal infiltration anesthesia in children: a randomized clinical trial. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2014;15(6):750–754. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1611.
    1. Hosseini H. R., Parirokh M., Nakhaee N., V Abbott P., Samani S. Efficacy of articaine and lidocaine for buccal infiltration of first maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized double-blinded clinical trial. Iranian Endodontic Journal. 2016;11(2):79–84. doi: 10.7508/iej.2016.02.001.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir