ArticleJDR clinical and translational research2022
Physical Constraint in Pediatric Dentistry: The Lived Experience of Parents.
Article in JDR clinical and translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Virtual Reality Goggles as a Distraction Technique for Managing Behavioral Conduct During Pulp Pediatric Dental Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Paediatric Dental Pain Management: Children's and Parents' Perspectives in Kosovo.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Comparison of Parental Perceptions and Oxygen Saturation Response to Papoose Board and Comfy Wrap Restraints in Pediatric Dental Procedures: A Crossover Study.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of the sedative efficacy of oral midazolam (0.5 mg/kg vs. 0.75 mg/kg) with papoose board restraint for managing severe dental anxiety in paediatric patients: a retrospective cohort study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Reimagining Pediatric Dental Behavior Guidance: Introducing the Strategic Structured Collaborative Technique.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Pharmacological approaches and physical restraint in dental care for individuals with intellectual and neurodevelopmental disabilities and challenging behaviour: a scoping review of patients' and caregivers' experiences.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2025Article
- Trauma, Terror, and Toothpaste: Exploring Memories for Dental Visits Across a Range of Patient Fear.Oral (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Long-term Dental Anxiety Levels in Children Treated with and without Papoose Board: A Retrospective Cohort Pilot Study.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Feasibility, acceptability, and perceived effectiveness of weighted blankets during paediatric dental care.International journal of paediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Oral Care Experiences of Children with Down Syndrome: Caregiver and Dentist Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Provider perspectives on pain management practices and needs in pediatric dentistry.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2023Article
- Necessity and relevance of qualitative research in pediatric dentistry. A literature review.The Saudi dental journal · 2023Review
- Prevalence and Parental Attitude Toward Nitrous-Oxide and Papoose-Board Use in Two Dental Referral Centers in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of physical constraint in pediatric dentistry is highly controversial. Papoose boards in particular, which envelop and immobilize children during treatment procedures, have been described as barbaric devices even though their goal is to protect the patient. In this debate, the voice of parents is important but still missing in the scientific literature.
aimTo understand how parents or caregivers experienced physical constraint and the use of the papoose board on their children during regular dental treatment.
designWe conducted qualitative research rooted in interpretive phenomenology. Accordingly, we performed in-depth individual interviews with a purposive sample of 7 parents or caregivers. The interviews took place in Montréal, Canada, after the children had been treated with a papoose board for nonemergency dental treatments. The discussions were audio recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed.
resultsTwo perspectives emerged among participants. Some explained that the papoose board calmed their children, helped the dentist to complete the procedures, and made their experience less stressful. For others, the papoose board was a horrible and traumatizing experience, leading to feelings of guilt toward their children. They expressed anger toward the dentists for not allowing them enough time to decide and for imposing use of the device.
conclusionOur study raises serious ethical concerns about this practice. We believe that using a papoose board should remain an extraordinary measure and, more generally, that dental professionals should reflect on the place of children and their families in clinical encounters. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: The findings of this study should encourage policy makers, dental professionals and ethicists to consider the following points: 1) the traumatizing experiences described by parents raise serious ethical concerns about the use of papoose boards; 2) the dental profession should reflect on the place of children and their families in the clinical encounter and grapple with the importance of consent and how to ensure consent in encounters involving children and their parents.
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.