Trial reportBMJ open2015
Split-mouth and parallel-arm trials to compare pain with intraosseous anaesthesia delivered by the computerised Quicksleeper system and conventional infiltration anaesthesia in paediatric oral healthcare: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02084433 (Comparison of Intraosseous Anaesthesia Using a Computerized System), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Comparison of Intraosseous Anaesthesia Using a Computerized System (QuickSleeper) to Conventional Anesthesia
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is it possible to extract primary maxillary molars without palatal injection?: a controlled clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Trial
- Retrospective comparison of articaine buccal infiltration and lidocaine intraosseous anesthesia in carious mandibular molars.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- A Novel Scale to Assess Parental Satisfaction of Dental Local Anesthetic Techniques in Children: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pain research & management · 2023Observational
- Evaluation of Intraligamentous and Intraosseous Computer-Controlled Anesthetic Delivery Systems in Pediatric Dentistry: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical evaluation of efficacy of transcortical anesthesia for the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2020Article
- Inferior alveolar nerve block by intraosseous injection with Quicksleeper® at the retromolar area in mandibular third molar surgery.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2018Article
- CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Article
- A Split-Mouth Design Comparison for Lateral and Crestal Sinus Lift Techniques with Dental Implants Placements: Short Communication.The open dentistry journal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLocal anaesthesia is commonly used in paediatric oral healthcare. Infiltration anaesthesia is the most frequently used, but recent developments in anaesthesia techniques have introduced an alternative: intraosseous anaesthesia. We propose to perform a split-mouth and parallel-arm multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing the pain caused by the insertion of the needle for the injection of conventional infiltration anaesthesia, and intraosseous anaesthesia by the computerised QuickSleeper system, in children and adolescents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Inclusion criteria are patients 7-15 years old with at least 2 first permanent molars belonging to the same dental arch (for the split-mouth RCT) or with a first permanent molar (for the parallel-arm RCT) requiring conservative or endodontic treatment limited to pulpotomy. The setting of this study is the Department of Paediatric Dentistry at 3 University dental hospitals in France. The primary outcome measure will be pain reported by the patient on a visual analogue scale concerning the insertion of the needle and the injection/infiltration. Secondary outcomes are latency, need for additional anaesthesia during the treatment and pain felt during the treatment. We will use a computer-generated permuted-block randomisation sequence for allocation to anaesthesia groups. The random sequences will be stratified by centre (and by dental arch for the parallel-arm RCT). Only participants will be blinded to group assignment. Data will be analysed by the intent-to-treat principle. In all, 160 patients will be included (30 in the split-mouth RCT, 130 in the parallel-arm RCT). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been approved by the French ethics committee for the protection of people (Comité de Protection des Personnes, Ile de France I) and will be conducted in full accordance with accepted ethical principles. Findings will be reported in scientific publications and at research conferences, and in project summary papers for participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02084433.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.