ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2025
Comparative Evaluation of Pain Reduction with Vibration Using Speech Stimulator vs 2% Lignocaine Topical Gel Application Prior to Greater Palatine Nerve Block in 7-12-year-old Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims and background: Pain is one of the most important causes of anxiety in pediatric dental patients. A painful intraoral nerve block could detrimentally affect the child's behavior in the dental setting. The aim of this clinical trial was to evaluate the pain reduction effectiveness of the vibration technique by speech stimulator compared to 2% lignocaine topical gel in 7-12-year-old children requiring a greater palatine nerve (GPN) block. Methods: This study was a double-blinded randomized controlled trial that enrolled 60 children between 7 and 12 years old. The randomization list was generated by block randomization, and two groups were designated. The two groups of 30 samples each were selected based on the types of preanesthetic preparations received. The first group (group A) was assigned 2% lignocaine gel while the second group (group B) received vibration using a speech simulator for preanesthetic preparation at the site of the GPN block. The preanesthetic techniques were administered by pretrained and blinded assessors. The response of all the subjects was assessed using the facial pain scale (FPS) and SEM score (Sound, Eye, Motor) by an assessor. The FPS score was recorded using the response of the child with the scale ranging from 0 to 10, following the GPN block. Whereas the SEM score was evaluated by the assessor to assess the pain perception of the child, with scores ranging from 1 to 4. The Mann-Whitney Results: It was found that the difference in the mean scores of FPS and SEM scales between group A and group B was statistically significant. The mean scores of both FPS and SEM scales were higher in group A (2% lignocaine gel) ( Conclusion: The study demonstrated that when vibration was used as preanesthetic preparation, it caused less pain/discomfort during the administration of a GPN block than 2% lignocaine gel application. Clinical significance: The preanesthetic technique employing vibration could be an alternative or could replace the 2% lignocaine topical anesthetic application, especially in nerve blocks of areas with thick underlying mucoperiosteum (nasopalatine or GPN block). How to cite this article: Prasanth S, Padmakumari B, Bhageeradhi D,
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.