ArticleHeliyon2021
Patient evaluations after local anesthesia with a computer-assisted method and a conventional syringe before and after reflection time: A prospective randomized controlled trial.
Article in Heliyon, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative evaluation of anesthetic delivery systems on pain, anxiety, and physiological responses in pediatric dental patients: A randomized clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Comparison of computer-controlled versus conventional local anesthesia delivery systems: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Effect of Needle Insertion Angle on Pain During Labial Infiltration Anesthesia of the Anterior Maxilla: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2024Trial
- Pain perception following computer-controlled versus conventional dental anesthesia: randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2022Trial
- Comparison of Computer-Controlled Intraligamentary Local Anesthesia and Conventional Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Primary Molar Extractions: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Digital Dentistry in Clinical Practice: A Scoping Review of Current Capabilities and Future Directions.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Efficacy of an Electronic Constant-Speed Injector in Reducing Pain of Local Anesthesia in a Scalp Procedure.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Comments regarding the recent publication by Abou Chedid et al. 2023 Comparative study of two different computer-controlled local anesthesia injection systems in children: a randomized clinical trial.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2025Article
- Computer-Controlled Local Anaesthesia Delivery efficacy - a literature review.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Review
- Efficacy of computer-controlled local anesthesia delivery system on pain in dental anesthesia: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2024Review
- Review
- The Use of Modern Technologies by Dentists in Poland: Questionnaire among Polish Dentists.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis prospective randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate and compare patient response to a conventional syringe and a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLAD) both immediately and after reflection time, including the impact of anesthesia duration.
methodsTwenty adult patients (10 men and 10 women) with at least two tooth-neck defects each in different quadrants were treated with local buccal infiltration anesthesia. Using split-mouth design, one quadrant was anesthetized using a conventional syringe, the other with CCLAD. The time elapsed between time of injection and time of disappearance of numbness was recorded. Patients were asked to mark on a Visual Analog Scale their visual impression of the device regarding anxiety-inducement, their sensation of mucosal puncture, pain during administration, and pain perception during treatment for the two different methods as well as future preference immediately after treatment and after reflection time.
resultsThe level of anxiety-inducement and pain during administration were ranked three times higher with the conventional syringe (35.95%-11.85%, p < 0.001 and 21.3%-7.7%, p = 0.005, respectively). There was no difference in mean sensation of mucosal puncture, nor a statistically significant correlation between duration of administration and time until disappearance of numbness. Once anesthesia was administered, no pain during treatment was detected using either method. Patients' preference of methods changed significantly with time in favor of CCLAD (p = 0.01).
conclusionsThe use of CCLAD increased patients' comfort visually and in terms of administration; patients' preference in favor of CCLAD increased with time. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Patients' preference of CCLAD over against the conventional syringe, even more so after reflection time, can imply the preference of CCLAD for clinicians, too, in order to enhance patients' and clinicians' comfort.
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.