J Dent Anesth Pain Med.  2018 Apr;18(2):79-88. 10.17245/jdapm.2018.18.2.79.

Alternative practices of achieving anaesthesia for dental procedures: a review

• Angelo Z
• Polyvios C

• KMID: 2410140
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2018.18.2.79

Abstract

Managing pain and anxiety in patients has always been an essential part of dentistry. To prevent pain, dentists administer local anaesthesia (LA) via a needle injection. Unfortunately, anxiety and fear that arise prior to and/or during injection remains a barrier for many children and adults from receiving dental treatment. There is a constant search for techniques to alleviate the invasive and painful nature of the needle injection. In recent years, researchers have developed alternative methods which enable dental anaesthesia to be less invasive and more patient-friendly. The aim of this review is to highlight the procedures and devices available which may replace the conventional needle-administered local anaesthesia. The most known alternative methods in providing anaesthesia in dentistry are: topical anaesthesia, electronic dental anaesthesia, jet-injectors, iontophoresis, and computerized control local anaesthesia delivery systems. Even though these procedures are well accepted by patients to date, it is the authors' opinion that the effectiveness practicality of such techniques in general dentistry is not without limitations.

Keyword

Electronic Dental Anesthesia; Local Anesthesia; Needleless Anesthesia; Needle-Free Anesthesia

MeSH Terms

Adult
Anesthesia, Local
Anxiety
Child
Dentistry
Dentists
Humans
Iontophoresis
Needles

Reference

1. Milgrom P, Coldwell SE, Getz T, Weinstein P, Ramsay DS. Four dimensions of fear of dental injections. J Am Dent Assoc. 1997; 128:756–766.

2. Oztas N, Ulusu T, Bodur H, Dogan C. The Wand in pulp therapy: an alternative to inferior alveolar nerve block. Quintessence Int. 2005; 36:559–564.

3. Pinkham JR, Casamassimo PS, Fields HW, McTigue DJ, Nowak AJ. Pediatric Dentistry In: Infancy through Adolescence. 4th ed. St Louis, Mo: Elsevier Saunders;2005. p. 394–413.

4. ten Berge M, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J, Prins PJ. Childhood dental fear in the Netherlands: prevalence and normative data. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2002; 30:101–107.

5. Szmuk P, Szmuk E, Ezri T. Use of needle-free injection systems to alleviate needle phobia and pain at injection. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2005; 5:467–477.

6. Milgrom P, Weinstein P, Getz T. A Patient Management Handbook In: Treating Fearful Dental Patients. 2nd ed. Seattle: University of Washington Continuing Dental Education;1995.

7. Dabarakis NN, Alexander V, Tsirlis AT, Parissis NA, Nikolaos M. Needle-less local anesthesia: clinical evaluation of the effectiveness of jet anesthesia injex in local anesthesia in dentistry. Quintessence Int. 2007; 38:E572–E576.

8. Eloesser L. Recent advances in regional (local) anesthesia. Cal State Med J. 1912; 10:90–97.

9. Moore PA, Hersh EV, Boynes SG. Preface update of dental local anaesthesia. Dent Clin N Am. 2010; 54:13–14.

10. Sharma SS, Aruna Sharma S, Saravanan C, Sathyabama . Newer local anaesthetic drugs and delivery systems in dentistry – an update. J Dent Med Sci. 2012; 1:10–16.

11. Malamed SF. Handbook of local anesthesia. 4th ed. St Louis: CV Mosby;1997.

12. Meechan JG. Intra-oral topical anaesthetics: a review. J Dent. 2000; 28:3–14.

13. Evers H. Present research in local analgesics. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988; 26:390–394.

14. Lim S, Julliard K. Evaluating the efficacy of EMLA topical anesthetic in sealant placement with rubber dam. Pediatr Dent. 2004; 26:497–500.

15. AstraZeneca. Instructions for application: EMLA cream (lidocaine 2.5% and prilocaine 2.5%). Wilmington, Del: AstraZeneca;2002.

16. Meechan JG, Thomason JM. A comparison of 2 topical anaesthetics on the discomfort of intraligamentary injections: a double-blind, split-mouth volunteer clinical trial. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999; 87:362–365.

17. Svensson P, Petersen JK, Svensson H. Efficacy of a topical anesthetic on pain and unpleasantness during scaling of gingival pockets. Anesth Prog. 1994; 41:35–39.

18. Donaldson D, Meechan JG. A comparison of the effects of EMLA cream and topical 5% lidocaine on discomfort during gingival probing. Anesth Prog. 1995; 42:7–10.

19. Pere P, Iizuka T, Rosenberg PH, Lindqvist C. Topical application of 5% eutectic mixture of lignocaine and prilocaine (EMLA) before removal of arch bars. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992; 30:153–156.

20. Taware CP, Mazumdar S, Pendharkar M, Adani MH, Devarajan PV. A bioadhesive delivery system as an alternative to infiltration anaesthesia. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1997; 84:609–615.

21. Greengrass SR, Andrzejowski J, Ruiz K. Topical bupivacaine for pain control following simple dental extractions. Br Dent J. 1998; 184:354–355.

22. Tehnodent.org. TehnoDent - Desensetin - Gel for topical anesthesia. [online]. Accessed 23 Jan. 2018. Available at: http://www.tehnodent.org/en/products/auxiliary-materials/desensetin-%E2%80%93-gel-for-topical-anesthesia.

23. Septodont.co.uk. Xylonor Gel - PAIN MANAGEMENT category - Septodont. [online]. Accessed 23 Jan. 2018. Available at: http://www.septodont.co.uk/products/xylonor-gel.

24. Woolf CJ, Thompson JW. Stimulation fibre-induced analgesia: transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and vibration. In : Wall PD, Melzack R, editors. Textbook of Pain. 3rd Ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone;1994. p. 1191–1208.

25. Shealy CN, Taslitz N, Mortimer JT, Becker DP. Electrical inhibition of pain: experimental evaluation. Anesth Analg. 1967; 46:299–305.

26. Black RR. Use of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 1986; 113:649–652.

27. Saxena P, Gupta SK, Newaskar V, Chandra A. Advances in dental local anesthesia techniques and devices: an update. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 4:19–24.

28. Munshi AK, Hedge AM, Girdhar D. Clinical evaluation of electronic dental anesthesia for various procedures in pediatric dentistry. J Clin Paediatr Dent. 2000; 24:199–204.

29. Dhindsa A, Pandit IK, Srivastava N, Gugnani N. Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of electronic dental anesthesia with 2% lignocaine in various minor pediatric dental procedures: a clinical study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2011; 2:27–30.

30. Cho SY, Drummond BK, Anderson MH, Williams S. Effectiveness of electronic dental anesthesia for restorative care in children. Pediatr Dent. 1998; 20:105–111.

31. Abdulhameed SM, Feigal RJ, Rudney JD, Kajander KC. Effect of peripheral electrical stimulation on measures of tooth pain threshold and oral soft tissue comfort in children. Anesth Prog. 1989; 36:52–57.

32. Quarnstrom F. Electronic dental anesthesia. Anesth Prog. 1992; 39:162–177.

33. Clark MS, Silverstone LM, Lindenmuth J, Hicks MJ, Averbach RE, Kleier DJ, et al. An evaluation of the clinical analgesia/anesthesia efficacy on acute pain using the high frequency neural modulator in various dental settings. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1987; 63:501–505.

34. Wilson S, Molina LL, Preisch J, Weaver J. The effect of electronic dental anesthesia on behavior during local anesthetic injection in the young, sedated dental patient. Pediatr Dent. 1999; 21:12–17.

35. Kasat V, Gupta A, Ladda R, Kathariya M, Saluja H, Farooqui AA. Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) in dentistry - a review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2014; 6:e562–e568.

36. Clark TM, Yagiela JA. Advanced techniques and armamentarium for dental local anesthesia. Dent Clin North Am. 2010; 54:757–768.

37. Bennett CR, Monheim LM. Production of local anesthesia by jet injection. a clinical study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971; 32:526–530.

38. Munshi AK, Hegde A, Bashir N. Clinical evaluation of the efficacy of anesthesia and patient preference using the needle-less jet syringe in pediatric dental practice. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2001; 25:131–136.

39. Saravia ME, Bush JP. The needleless syringe: efficacy of anesthesia and patient preference in child dental patients. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 1991; 15:109–112.

40. Wong JK. Adjunct to local anesthesia: separating fact from fiction. J Can Dent Assoc. 2011; 67:391–397.

41. Lehtinen R. Efficiency of jet injection technique in production of local anesthesia. Proc Finn Dent Soc. 1979; 75:13–14.

42. Khan A, Yasir M, Asif M, Chauhan I, Singh AP, Sharma R, et al. Iontophoretic drug delivery: history and applications. J App Pharm Sci. 2011; 1:11–24.

43. Gangarosa LP, Park NH, Fong BC, Scott DF, Hill JM. Conductivity of drugs used for iontophoresis. J Pharm Sci. 1978; 67:1439–1443.

44. Tharian EB, Tandon S. Iontophoresis. a novel drug administration for extraction of deciduous teeth. a clinical evaluation. Indian J Dent Res. 1994; 5:97–100.

45. Friedman MJ, Hochman MN. A 21st century computerized injection system for local pain control. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1997; 18:995–1000. 1002–1004.

46. Second YLK, Neelakantan P. Local anesthetics in dentistry –newer methods of delivery. Int J Pharm Clin Res. 2014; 6:4–6.

47. Koyuturk AE, Avsar A, Sumer M. Efficacy of dental practitioners in injection techniques: computerized device and traditional syringe. Quintessence Int. 2009; 40:73–77.

48. Kwak EJ, Pang NS, Cho JH, Jung BY, Kim KD, Park W. Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery for painless anesthesia: a literature review. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2016; 16:81–88.

49. Nicholson JW, Berry TG, Summitt JB, Yuan CH, Witten TM. Pain perception and utility: a comparison of the syringe and computerized local injection techniques. Gen Dent. 2001; 49:167–172.

50. Fukayama H, Yoshikawa F, Kohase H, Umino M, Suzuki N. Efficacy of anterior and middle superior alveolar (AMSA) anesthesia using a new injection system: the wand. Quintessence Int. 2003; 34:537–541.

51. Perry DA, Loomer PM. Maximizing pain control. the AMSA injection can provide anesthesia with few injections and less pain. Dimens Dent Hyg. 2003; 1:28–33.

52. Gibson RS, Allen K, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S. The wand vs. traditional injection: a comparison of pain related behaviors. Pediatr Dent. 2000; 22:458–462.

53. Ferrari M, Cagidiaco MC, Vichi A, Goracci C. Efficacy of the computer-controlled injection system STATM, ligmaject, and the dental syringe for intraligamentary anesthesia in restorative patients. Int Dent SA. 2008; 11:4–12.

54. Grace EG, Barnes DM, Reid BC, Flores M, George DL. Computerized local dental anesthetic systems: Patient and dentist satisfaction. J Dent. 2003; 31:9–12.

55. Hochman MN. Single-tooth anesthesia: Pressure sensing technology provides innovative advancement in the field of dental local anesthesia. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2007; 28:186–193.

56. Meechan JG. Supplementary routes to local anaesthesia. Int Endod J. 2002; 35:885–896.

57. Özer S, Yaltirik M, Kirli I, Yargic I. A comparative evaluation of pain and anxiety levels in 2 different anesthesia techniques: locoregional anesthesia using conventional syringe versus intraosseous anesthesia using a computer-controlled system (Quicksleeper). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012; 114:S132–S139.

58. Dental Hi Tec. The keys to success with Quicksleeper. User manual and clinical guide. Cholet, France: Dental Hi Tec.

59. Sixou J, Marie-Cousin A, Huet A, Hingant B, Robert JC. Pain assessment by children and adolescents during intraosseous anaesthesia using a computerized system (QuickSleeper™). Int J Paediatr Dent. 2009; 19:360–366.

60. Han K, Kim J. Intraosseous anesthesia using a computer-controlled system during non-surgical periodontal therapy (root planing): two case reports. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2018; 18:65–69.

61. 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–e429.