Efficacy of topical anesthetics of lidocaine, benzocaine, and EMLA in reducing pain during inferior alveolar nerve block in schoolchildren: a randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.5 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE BDJ Open Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI:10.1038/s41405-024-00275-8
Mawia Karkoutly, Laila Alatassi, Lilian Azrak, Nada Bshara
{"title":"Efficacy of topical anesthetics of lidocaine, benzocaine, and EMLA in reducing pain during inferior alveolar nerve block in schoolchildren: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Mawia Karkoutly, Laila Alatassi, Lilian Azrak, Nada Bshara","doi":"10.1038/s41405-024-00275-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 5% EMLA cream and 8% lidocaine gel in reducing pain during inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) compared with 20% Benzocaine in children aged 6-10 years.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a triple-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, active-controlled trial with three arms. 45 children were randomly assigned into 3 groups. Group 1: control group, 20% benzocaine gel (n = 15). Group 2: 8% lidocaine gel (n = 15). Group 3: 5% EMLA cream (n = 15). Each topical anesthetic was applied in an amount of 0.3 mL using a cotton swab for 2 min, followed by IANB administration. The following primary outcome measures were considered: pulse rate, the face, legs, activity, cry, consolability (FLACC) behavioral pain assessment scale, and the Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean score of the FLACC behavioral pain assessment scale in group 2 (2.20 ± 1.86) was slightly higher, but this result was not statistically significant p = (0.806). Regarding the Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale scores, no statistically significant difference was noted between the study groups p = (0.593). After IANB administration, the mean pulse rate was higher in group 3 (102.40 ± 14.28). However, this difference was not statistically significant p = (0.351). In addition, the mean change of the pulse rate from the baseline to this time point was not statistically significant p = (0.638), indicating a smaller physiologic response to the painful stimulus.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>8% lidocaine gel was not superior to 20% benzocaine nor 5% EMLA in reducing pain during IANB administration.</p>","PeriodicalId":36997,"journal":{"name":"BDJ Open","volume":"10 1","pages":"87"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BDJ Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-024-00275-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 5% EMLA cream and 8% lidocaine gel in reducing pain during inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) compared with 20% Benzocaine in children aged 6-10 years.

Materials and methods: This was a triple-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, active-controlled trial with three arms. 45 children were randomly assigned into 3 groups. Group 1: control group, 20% benzocaine gel (n = 15). Group 2: 8% lidocaine gel (n = 15). Group 3: 5% EMLA cream (n = 15). Each topical anesthetic was applied in an amount of 0.3 mL using a cotton swab for 2 min, followed by IANB administration. The following primary outcome measures were considered: pulse rate, the face, legs, activity, cry, consolability (FLACC) behavioral pain assessment scale, and the Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale.

Results: The mean score of the FLACC behavioral pain assessment scale in group 2 (2.20 ± 1.86) was slightly higher, but this result was not statistically significant p = (0.806). Regarding the Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale scores, no statistically significant difference was noted between the study groups p = (0.593). After IANB administration, the mean pulse rate was higher in group 3 (102.40 ± 14.28). However, this difference was not statistically significant p = (0.351). In addition, the mean change of the pulse rate from the baseline to this time point was not statistically significant p = (0.638), indicating a smaller physiologic response to the painful stimulus.

Conclusion: 8% lidocaine gel was not superior to 20% benzocaine nor 5% EMLA in reducing pain during IANB administration.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利多卡因、苯佐卡因和 EMLA 局部麻醉剂减轻学龄儿童下牙槽神经阻滞疼痛的效果:随机对照试验。
研究目的本研究旨在评估5% EMLA乳膏和8%利多卡因凝胶与20%苯佐卡因相比在减轻6-10岁儿童下牙槽神经阻滞(IANB)过程中疼痛的效果:这是一项三盲、随机、平行组、主动对照试验。45 名儿童被随机分为 3 组。第一组:对照组,20% 苯佐卡因凝胶(n = 15)。第 2 组:8% 利多卡因凝胶(n = 15)。第 3 组:5% EMLA 乳膏(n = 15)。每种局部麻醉剂用棉签蘸取 0.3 毫升,持续 2 分钟,然后注射 IANB。主要结果指标包括:脉搏、脸部、腿部、活动、哭泣、安慰(FLACC)行为疼痛评估量表和 Wong-Baker FACES 疼痛评分量表:结果:第 2 组的 FLACC 行为疼痛评估量表平均分(2.20 ± 1.86)略高,但这一结果在统计学上并不显著,P = (0.806)。至于 Wong-Baker FACES 疼痛评分量表的得分,研究组之间的差异无统计学意义 p = (0.593)。使用 IANB 后,第 3 组的平均脉搏率较高(102.40 ± 14.28)。然而,这一差异并无统计学意义 p = (0.351)。结论:8% 利多卡因凝胶在减轻 IANB 给药期间的疼痛方面并不优于 20% 苯佐卡因或 5% EMLA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BDJ Open
BDJ Open Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
34
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of topical anesthetics of lidocaine, benzocaine, and EMLA in reducing pain during inferior alveolar nerve block in schoolchildren: a randomized controlled trial. Incidence of traumatic dental injuries associated with orotracheal intubation in general anesthesia in children during mixed dentition in Damascus, Syria: a prospective longitudinal study. Comparative evaluation of sealing ability and adaptation of gel form of MTA to dentinal walls: an in-vitro study. Knowledge and awareness of emergency department residents and physicians regarding the management of dentofacial traumatic injuries: a cross-sectional study. Evaluation of two different self-disinfection alginate impression material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1