ArticleCureus2024
A Comparative Study of Parent and Child Perspectives on Using the Intranasal Mucosal Atomization Device for Behavior Management in Pediatric Dental Sedation.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Investigate the effect of oxygen-driven salbutamol combined with methylprednisolone on bronchial asthma from the perspective of serum molecular markers.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Different Forms of Topical Anesthesia Agents in Dental Practice.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Dental anxiety in children often necessitates sedation for effective treatment. Different methods of sedation have proved to be beneficial. However, intranasal sedation provides a needleless, rapid drug delivery method that bypasses hepatic metabolism. Intranasal sedative drugs can be delivered using a mucosal atomization device (MAD). This study aimed to find the opinions, beliefs, and existing knowledge of parents and children regarding intranasal sedation and the method of drug delivery through MAD. Materials and methods The study comprised 50 parents, aged 20 to 50, who came in with a single child, aged five to nine years. In separate rooms, parents and kids were each shown a video about the use of the intranasal sedation technique with MAD as a pharmaceutical help during routine dental procedures. After the video presentation, each participant was required to complete a pretested self-made questionnaire with 21 questions and multiple-choice options. The chi-square test was used in the statistical analysis of the completed questionnaires (P < 0.05). Paired t-test was used for behavior assessment of the children before and after intranasal sedation. Results A significant correlation between parental socioeconomic status and acceptance of intranasal sedation was observed. Parents with higher education levels exhibited a greater level of acceptance (P = 0.000). Parents whose children had prior dental experiences were more likely to view intranasal sedation as a safe option (P = 0.038). Additionally, a significant proportion of previously sedated children expressed willingness to undergo treatment using intranasal sedation. Evaluation of children's behavior before and after treatment revealed a notable improvement, indicating the effectiveness of intranasal sedation (P = 0.000). Conclusion The study thoroughly investigated how parents and children view intranasal sedation via MAD. It revealed a positive perception of safety and trust among parents regarding this method for pediatric dental procedures.
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.