Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36865722›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry

Comparative Evaluation of Reduction in Pain Perception Using 5% Topical LA vs Freezed Cone as a Preparatory Agent for Intraoral Injection in Children and Effect of VRD as Distraction Technique.

Rashi Singh, Nidhi Gupta, Natasha Gambhir

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rashi SinghDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Santosh Medical/Dental Colleges and Hospital (Deemed to be University), Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8224-7095
Nidhi GuptaDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Santosh Medical/Dental Colleges and Hospital (Deemed to be University), Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1900-8622
Natasha GambhirDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Santosh Medical/Dental Colleges and Hospital (Deemed to be University), Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1301-0502
Santosh University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: To compare freezed cone and 5% lignocaine as a numbing agent before intraoral injection and evaluate the effect of virtual reality distraction (VRD) as a distraction technique in reducing pain perception in children. Study design: Around 60 children of 6-11 years old undergoing treatment for the extraction or any pulp therapy of primary tooth were selected. Freezed cone and 5% lidocaine were used to decrease the pain during local anesthesia (LA). VRD was used as a distraction method and to analyze the pain perception, Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale was used. Materials and methods: Each child was randomly assigned to receive ice as a topical anesthetic or lignocaine 5% as a topical anesthetic agent. The pain perception was evaluated after the injection of 2% lignocaine hydrochloride (HCL). The primary researcher evaluated the pain during injection using the sound, eye, motor (SEM) scale. The pain experienced during injection was evaluated using Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale. Results: In the freezed cone group with the VRD technique, maximum responded to the less pain score. On the contrary, many responded to higher pain scores in the freezed cone group without the VRD technique. Conclusion: It was concluded that the VRD technique can be used for distraction and the frozen ice cone can be an alternative method to reduce the pain perception during LA. How to cite this article: Singh R, Gupta N, Gambhir N. Comparative Evaluation of Reduction in Pain Perception Using 5% Topical LA vs Freezed Cone as a Preparatory Agent for Intraoral Injection in Children and Effect of VRD as Distraction Technique. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022;15(5):558-563.

Indexed as

5% lidogaine gelDistraction techniqueFreezed coneIntraoral injectionPain PerceptionWong–Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale

Identifiers

PMID36865722
PMCPMC9973116
OpenAlexW4319000657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.