Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33827123›Full record

ArticleAnesthesia progress2021

Local Anesthetic Usage Among Dentists: German and International Data.

Frank Halling, Andreas Neff, Thomas Ziebart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anesthesia progress, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Frank HallingAssistant Professor, Private Practice, Gesundheitszentrum Fulda, Fulda, Germany, and Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital, Marburg, Germany.
Andreas NeffProfessor, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital, Marburg, Germany.
Thomas ZiebartAssistant Professor, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital, Marburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the use of dental local anesthetics in Germany compared with international data. The type and distribution of dental local anesthetics and added vasoconstrictors based on a representative sample of German dentists itemized over a period of 7 years (2011 to 2017) were evaluated and statistically analyzed. The results were compared with international dental local anesthetic consumption data published since 2005. With a consistent market share of nearly 98%, articaine was the first-line local dental anesthetic agent in Germany. During the investigation period, German dental local anesthetics with epinephrine 1:200,000 had ∼50% market shares, whereas formulations with epinephrine 1:100,000 had 40% to 45% market shares. Articaine, with market shares between 38% and 81%, was also the preferred anesthetic agent in various other countries, with the notable exceptions of the United Kingdom and the United States, where lidocaine was the preferred local anesthetic agent. Epinephrine was the preferred vasoconstrictor internationally, similar to Germany. The larger market share of higher concentrated epinephrine 1:100,000 was remarkable, considering the increasing number of medically compromised patients. Increased consideration for using agents with reduced dosages of epinephrine (1:200,000) is generally recommended.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, DentalAnesthetics, LocalAnesthesia, LocalCarticaineDentistsDouble-Blind MethodEpinephrineHumansLidocaineVasoconstrictor AgentsAnesthetics, LocalCarticaineEpinephrineLidocaineVasoconstrictor AgentsArticaineDentistsEpinephrineGermanyInternational dataLidocaineLocal anestheticsReported usageUsage

Identifiers

PMID33827123
PMCPMC8033583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.