MedTrace Logo

PDL Anesthesia Versus Local Infiltration

NCT03173898 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 55

Last updated 2017-06-05

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

The literature concerning the success and pain scores of PDL injection technique compared with other techniques remains controversial; whereas some studies found no significant difference in pain scores between local infiltration and PDL injection, other older studies found that pain during administration of PDL injection was described by the majority of patients either as greater than local infiltration6, or as negligible or as a less painful injection compared with other injection techniques. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of and patients' subjective responses to the PDL injection technique as compared to the traditional infiltration injection, for the non-surgical extraction of one posterior maxillary permanent tooth.

Conditions

  • Anesthesia, Local

Interventions

PROCEDURE

PDL anesthesia versus local infiltration

Every patient received the recommended volumes of 2% lidocaine with 1:100.000 epinephrine for PDL injection on the experimental side, and for local infiltration on the control side. A Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to describe the pain felt during injection.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • University of Jordan

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Mohammad H Al-Shayyab, Fellowship · The University of Jordan

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
QUADRUPLE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
12 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2015-07-06
Primary Completion
2016-01-31
Completion
2016-01-31

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT03173898 on ClinicalTrials.gov