바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

메뉴
search

ISSN : 0376-4672

논문 상세

이전
논문 투고

56권 1호

국소마취시 통증을 줄이기 위한 기기들

Devices for reducing Pain during local anesthesia

박원서 (연세대학교)
대한치과의사협회지 / The Journal of the Korean Dental Association, (P)0376-4672; (E)2713-7961
2017, v.56 no.1, pp.58-65
https://doi.org/10.22974/jkda.2017.56.1.005
박원서. (2017). 국소마취시 통증을 줄이기 위한 기기들. 대한치과의사협회지, 56(1), 58-65, https://doi.org/10.22974/jkda.2017.56.1.005

Abstract

Dental local anesthesia is important procedure for the elimination of pain during dental treatment. However, the pain during local anesthesia is one of the main source of fear to the patients. The cause of pain during dental local anesthesia includes soft tissue damage during penetration of the oral mucosa, pressure from the spread of the anesthetic solution, temperature of anesthetic solution, low pH of anesthetic solution, and the characteristics of the drug. Several concepts and devices introduced to date to reduce the pain during local anesthesia for dental treatment. In this report, devices that can reduce the pain during local anesthesia will be discussed.

keywords
Fear, Local anesthesia, Pain, Computer Controlled Local Anesthetic Delivery (CCLAD), Vibrotactile device, Intraosseous Anesthesia

참고문헌

1.

1. Kleinknecht RA, Klepac RK, Alexander LD. Origins and characteristics of fear of dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 1973; 86: 842-8.

2.

2. Milgrom P, Mancl L, King B, Weinstein P. Origins of childhood dental fear. Behav Res Ther 1995; 33:313-9.

3.

3. Malamed SF. Local anesthesia. J Calif Dent Assoc 1998; ?26: 657, 60.

4.

4. Saloum FS, Baumgartner JC, Marshall G, Tinkle J. A clinical comparison of pain perception to the Wand and a traditional syringe. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000; 89: 691-5.

5.

5. Hochman M, Chiarello D, Hochman CB, Lopatkin R, Pergola S. Computerized local anesthetic delivery vs. traditional syringe technique. Subjective pain response. N Y State Dent J 1997; 63: 24-9.

6.

6. Feda M, Al Amoudi N, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N, Masoud I, et al. A comparative study of children's pain reactions and perceptions to AMSA injection using CCLAD versus traditional injections. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2010; 34: 217-22.

7.

7. Thoppe-Dhamodhara YK, Asokan S, John BJ, Pollachi- Ramakrishnan G, Ramachandran P, Vilvanathan P. Cartridge syringe vs computer controlled local anesthetic delivery system: Pain related behaviour over two sequential visits - a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Exp Dent 2015;7: e513-8.

8.

8. Mittal M, Kumar A, Srivastava D, Sharma P, Sharma S. Pain Perception: Computerized versus Traditional Local Anesthesia in Pediatric Patients. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015; 39: 470-4.

9.

9. Langthasa M, Yeluri R, Jain AA, Munshi AK. Comparison of the pain perception in children using comfort control syringe and a conventional injection technique during pediatric dental procedures. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2012; 30: 323-8.

10.

10. Baghlaf K, Alamoudi N, Elashiry E, Farsi N, El Derwi DA, Abdullah AM. The pain-related behavior and pain perception associated with computerized anesthesia in pulpotomies of mandibular primary molars: A randomized controlled trial. Quintessence Int 2015; 46: 799-806.

11.

11. Alamoudi NM, Baghlaf KK, Elashiry EA, Farsi NM, El Derwi DA, Bayoumi AM. The effectiveness of com- puterized anesthesia in primary mandibular molar pulpo- tomy: A randomized controlled trial. Quintessence Int 2016; 47: 217-24.

12.

12. Kandiah P, Tahmassebi JF. Comparing the onset of maxillary infiltration local anaesthesia and pain experience using the conventional technique vs. the Wand in children. Br Dent J 2012; 213: E15.

13.

13. Tahmassebi JF, Nikolaou M, Duggal MS. A comparison of pain and anxiety associated with the administration of maxillary local analgesia with Wand and conventional technique. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2009; 10: 77-82.

14.

14. Versloot J, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J. Pain behaviour and distress in children during two sequential dental visits: comparing a computerised anaesthesia delivery system and a traditional syringe. Br Dent J 2008; 205: E2;discussion 30-1.

15.

15. Al Amoudi N, Feda M, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N. Assessment of the anesthetic effectiveness of anterior and middle superior alveolar injection using a computerized device versus traditional technique in children. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008;33: 97-102.

16.

16. Klein U, Hunzeker C, Hutfless S, Galloway A. Quality of anesthesia for the maxillary primary anterior segment in pediatric patients: comparison of the P-ASA nerve block using CompuMed delivery system vs traditional supra- periosteal injections. J Dent Child (Chic) 2005; 72: 119-25.

17.

17. Palm AM, Kirkegaard U, Poulsen S. The wand versus traditional injection for mandibular nerve block in children and adolescents: perceived pain and time of onset. Pediatr Dent 2004; 26: 481-4.

18.

18. Ram D, Peretz B. The assessment of pain sensation during local anesthesia using a computerized local anesthesia (Wand) and a conventional syringe. J Dent Child (Chic) 2003;70: 130-3.

19.

19. Kammerer PW, Schiegnitz E, von Haussen T, Shabazfar N, Kammerer P, Willershausen B, et al. Clinical efficacy of a computerised device (STA)and a pressure syringe (VarioJect INTRA) for intraligamentary anaesthesia. Eur J Dent Educ 2015; 19: 16-22.

20.

20. Singh S, Garg A. Comparison of the pain levels of computer controlled and conventional anesthesia tech- niques in supraperiosteal injections: a randomized con- trolled clinical trial. Acta Odontol Scand 2013; 71: 740-3.

21.

21. ChangH,NohJ,LeeJ,KimS,KooKT,KimTI,et al. Relief of Injection Pain During the Delivery of Local Anesthesia by Computer-Controlled Anesthetic Delivery System for Periodontal Surgery:Randomised Clinical Controlled Trial. J Periodontol 2016: 1-10.

22.

22. Beneito-Brotons R, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Ata-Ali J, Penarrocha M. Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: a preliminary study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2012; 17: e426-9.

23.

23. Lee S, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M, Weaver J. Anesthetic efficacy of the anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) injection. Anesth Prog 2004; 51:80-9.

24.

24. Loomer PM, Perry DA. Computer-controlled delivery versus syringe delivery of local anesthetic injections for therapeutic scaling and root planing. J Am Dent Assoc 2004; 135: 358-65.

25.

25. Shah M, Shivaswamy S, Jain S, Tambwekar S. A clinical ?comparison of pain perception and extent of area anesthetized by Wand ((R)) and a traditional syringe. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2012;16: 207-12.

26.

26. Ozer S, Yaltirik M, Kirli I, Yargic I. A comparative evaluation of pain and anxiety levels in 2 different anesthesia techniques: locoregional anesthesia using con- ventional syringe versus intraosseous anesthesia using a computer-controlled system (Quicksleeper). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012; 114: S132-9.

27.

27. Yenisey M. Comparison of the pain levels of computer- controlled and conventional anesthesia techniques in prosthodontic treatment. J Appl Oral Sci 2009; 17: 414-20.

28.

28. Yesilyurt C, Bulut G, Tasdemir T. Pain perception during inferior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conventional syringe. Br Dent J 2008; 205: E10; discussion 258-9.

29.

29. Sumer M, Misir F, Koyuturk AE. Comparison of the Wand with a conventional technique. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 101: e106-9.

30.

30. Nusstein J, Lee S, Reader A, Beck M, Weaver J. Injection pain and postinjection pain of the anterior middle superior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conven- tional syringe. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2004; 98: 124-31.

31.

31. Rosenberg ES. A computer-controlled anesthetic delivery system in a periodontal practice: patient satisfaction and acceptance. J Esthet Restor Dent 2002; 14: 39-46.

logo

논문 투고
OA 정책