ArticleBDJ open2024
Knowledge and attitudes toward anaphylaxis to local anesthetics in dental practice.
Article in BDJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Dental Students' and General Dentistry Residents' Knowledge Regarding the Management of Anaphylactic Shock in the Dental Practice: A Single-Centre Study in Romania.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Comprehensive management evaluation of anaphylactic shock in dental clinics across developing countries.International journal of emergency medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE/
aimThe absence of a comprehensive understanding of potential anaphylactic reactions to local anesthetics (LAs) and management can result in grave consequences. For this reason we aim to assess Latin American dentists' knowledge, preparedness, and competency in managing anaphylactic reactions to LAs. MATERIALS AND
methodsDesign: A cross-sectional study was conducted from November 2021 to February 2022. Board-certified dentists answered a survey comprising 26 structured questions. Chi-square tests and logistic regression models were performed in Stata 17.0.
settingArgentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, Peru, Venezuela, and other Latin American countries.
resultsOf 507 respondents, lidocaine was the most frequently used LA (88.1%). While 85.2% could identify dyspnea as a symptom of anaphylaxis, only 50.1% knew the correct route for epinephrine administration, and just 43.5% had epinephrine in their emergency kits. Confidence in managing anaphylactic reactions was low (9.6%). Older age was inversely related to both knowledge of anaphylaxis management and the possession of epinephrine (P = 0.003 and P = 0.0001, respectively). DISCUSSION: Our study highlights a concerning discrepancy between the practical readiness of Latin American dentists in handling anaphylaxis.
conclusionThe study's findings underscore the need for educational interventions to improve the readiness to identify and handle anaphylactic emergencies in dental practice.
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.