Efficacy of lignocaine in gel and spray form during buccal infiltration anesthesia in children: a randomized clinical trial

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

AIM: To compare the efficacy of 15% lignocaine spray and 8% lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic, in reducing pain, during buccal infiltration in children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients aged between 7 and 12 years requiring restorative procedures/extraction/pulp therapy of primary/ permanent teeth in the maxillary arch, under buccal infiltration anesthesia were selected for the study. The participants were randomly allocated into 2 groups of 21 each. In group A, 8% lignocaine gel and in group B, 15% lignocaine spray was applied prior to buccal infiltration. Pain was assessed using Wong-Baker faces pain rating scale (WBFPRS) and faces legs activity cry and consolability (FLACC) painscale.

RESULTS: Pearson's chi-square test revealed that there was no significant difference in the FLACC scores of the two groups (p = 0.54). Independent t-test demonstrated that there was no significant difference in Wong-Bakers faces pain score between the two agents (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference in the efficacy of 15% lignocaine spray and 8% lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic in controlling pain during buccal infiltration anesthesia, in children.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)750-754
Number of pages5
JournalThe journal of contemporary dental practice
Volume15
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 01-11-2014

Fingerprint

Cheek
Local Anesthesia
Lidocaine
Randomized Controlled Trials
Gels
Facial Pain
Local Anesthetics
Pain
Leg
Deciduous Tooth
Chi-Square Distribution

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

@article{01662d1a572f46d699c6b9841b03b959,
title = "Efficacy of lignocaine in gel and spray form during buccal infiltration anesthesia in children: a randomized clinical trial",
abstract = "AIM: To compare the efficacy of 15{\%} lignocaine spray and 8{\%} lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic, in reducing pain, during buccal infiltration in children.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients aged between 7 and 12 years requiring restorative procedures/extraction/pulp therapy of primary/ permanent teeth in the maxillary arch, under buccal infiltration anesthesia were selected for the study. The participants were randomly allocated into 2 groups of 21 each. In group A, 8{\%} lignocaine gel and in group B, 15{\%} lignocaine spray was applied prior to buccal infiltration. Pain was assessed using Wong-Baker faces pain rating scale (WBFPRS) and faces legs activity cry and consolability (FLACC) painscale.RESULTS: Pearson's chi-square test revealed that there was no significant difference in the FLACC scores of the two groups (p = 0.54). Independent t-test demonstrated that there was no significant difference in Wong-Bakers faces pain score between the two agents (p = 0.07).CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference in the efficacy of 15{\%} lignocaine spray and 8{\%} lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic in controlling pain during buccal infiltration anesthesia, in children.",
author = "Anshul Sharma and Suprabha, {B. S.} and Ramya Shenoy and Arathi Rao",
year = "2014",
month = "11",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "750--754",
journal = "Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice",
issn = "1526-3711",
publisher = "Procter & Gamble Co.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Efficacy of lignocaine in gel and spray form during buccal infiltration anesthesia in children

T2 - a randomized clinical trial

AU - Sharma, Anshul

AU - Suprabha, B. S.

AU - Shenoy, Ramya

AU - Rao, Arathi

PY - 2014/11/1

Y1 - 2014/11/1

N2 - AIM: To compare the efficacy of 15% lignocaine spray and 8% lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic, in reducing pain, during buccal infiltration in children.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients aged between 7 and 12 years requiring restorative procedures/extraction/pulp therapy of primary/ permanent teeth in the maxillary arch, under buccal infiltration anesthesia were selected for the study. The participants were randomly allocated into 2 groups of 21 each. In group A, 8% lignocaine gel and in group B, 15% lignocaine spray was applied prior to buccal infiltration. Pain was assessed using Wong-Baker faces pain rating scale (WBFPRS) and faces legs activity cry and consolability (FLACC) painscale.RESULTS: Pearson's chi-square test revealed that there was no significant difference in the FLACC scores of the two groups (p = 0.54). Independent t-test demonstrated that there was no significant difference in Wong-Bakers faces pain score between the two agents (p = 0.07).CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference in the efficacy of 15% lignocaine spray and 8% lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic in controlling pain during buccal infiltration anesthesia, in children.

AB - AIM: To compare the efficacy of 15% lignocaine spray and 8% lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic, in reducing pain, during buccal infiltration in children.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients aged between 7 and 12 years requiring restorative procedures/extraction/pulp therapy of primary/ permanent teeth in the maxillary arch, under buccal infiltration anesthesia were selected for the study. The participants were randomly allocated into 2 groups of 21 each. In group A, 8% lignocaine gel and in group B, 15% lignocaine spray was applied prior to buccal infiltration. Pain was assessed using Wong-Baker faces pain rating scale (WBFPRS) and faces legs activity cry and consolability (FLACC) painscale.RESULTS: Pearson's chi-square test revealed that there was no significant difference in the FLACC scores of the two groups (p = 0.54). Independent t-test demonstrated that there was no significant difference in Wong-Bakers faces pain score between the two agents (p = 0.07).CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference in the efficacy of 15% lignocaine spray and 8% lignocaine gel as a topical anesthetic in controlling pain during buccal infiltration anesthesia, in children.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84973459080&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84973459080&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 25825102

AN - SCOPUS:84973459080

VL - 15

SP - 750

EP - 754

JO - Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

JF - Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

SN - 1526-3711

IS - 6

ER -