• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.41-47
• /
• 2021

Background: This study was designed to compare the efficacy of DentalVibe against 2% lidocaine gel in reducing pain during the administration of local anesthetic injection in the adult population. Methods: This was a split-mouth open-label, randomized, controlled clinical study conducted in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of a dental institute. Fifty patients who were scheduled for bilateral dental extractions requiring an inferior alveolar nerve block were enrolled in the study. Site A (n = 50) was coated with 2% lidocaine gel followed by a local anesthetic injection, and DentalVibe with local anesthetic injection was used for Site B (n = 50). The primary outcome was pain, which was recorded immediately after the administration of anesthetic injection using the Visual Analogue Scale [VAS 0 - 10]. Results: The VAS pain scores ranged from 4 to 10 for site A and 0 to 6 for site B. Comparison between the two sites showed a statistically significant difference [Mann-Whitney U test value = 51.50, P < 0.001] favoring site B. Conclusion: This study showed that DentalVibe reduces pain during injection of local anesthesia compared to topical anesthetic gel.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.44 no.4
• /
• pp.40.1-40.10
• /
• 2019

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the effect of DentalVibe on the level of pain experienced during anesthetic injections using 2 different techniques. Materials and Methods: This randomized crossover clinical trial evaluated 60 patients who required 2-session endodontic treatment. Labial infiltration (LI) anesthesia was administered in the anterior maxilla of 30 patients, while inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) was performed in the remaining 30 patients. 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine was injected at a rate of 1 mL/min using a 27-gauge needle. DentalVibe was randomly assigned to either the first or second injection session. A visual analog scale was used to determine participants' pain level during needle insertion and the anesthetic injection. The paired t-test was applied to assess the efficacy of DentalVibe for pain reduction. Results: In LI anesthesia, the pain level was 12.0 ± 15.5 and 38.1 ± 21.0 during needle insertion and 19.1 ± 16.1 and 48.9 ± 24.6 during the anesthetic injection using DentalVibe and the conventional method, respectively. In IANB, the pain level was 14.1 ± 15.9 and 35.1 ± 20.8 during needle insertion and 17.3 ± 14.2 and 39.5 ± 20.8 during the anesthetic injection using DentalVibe and the conventional method, respectively. DentalVibe significantly decreased the level of pain experienced during needle insertion and the anesthetic injection in anterior LI and mandibular IANB anesthesia. Conclusions: The results suggest that DentalVibe can be used to reduce the level of pain experienced by adult patients during needle insertion and anesthetic injection.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.6
• /
• pp.397-402
• /
• 2020

Background: Inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) is the most common, painful, and anxiety-provoking procedure involving needle insertion for anesthetic solution deposition. DentalVibeⓇ (DV) delivers vibration at a sustained frequency as a counter-stimulation to the site of injection, thereby alleviating pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of DV and lignocaine hydrochloride 2% gel (Lox 2% jelly) in pain reduction during IANB in children. Methods: A split-mouth randomized clinical trial was designed with a sample of 60 children (age, 6 to 12 years) requiring bilateral IANB for various dental procedures; DV was used while administering IANB and Lox 2% jelly was used as the topical anesthetic before administering IANB at subsequent appointments. During both appointments, pain perception was measured using the sound, eye, motor (SEM) scale and Wong-Baker faces pain rating scale (WBFPRS); oxygen saturation (SpO2) and pulse rate were measured using a pulse oximeter before, during, and after the IANB procedure. The obtained values were tabulated and subjected to statistical analysis. Wilcoxon test was used for intergroup comparison, and Friedman test, for intragroup comparison of measured variables at different treatment phases. Results: The medians and interquartile ranges of the WBFPRS scores recorded during the IANB procedure for DV and Lox 2% jelly were 2 (2-4) and 2 (0-2), respectively (P < 0.05). The SEM scale scores, mean SpO2, and pulse rate did not show any significant differences during the IANB procedure between both treatments. Conclusion: Both DV and Lox 2% jelly were found to be effective in pain reduction during IANB in children.