MedTrace Logo

Conventional Versus Computer-Assisted Dental Anesthesia

NCT07731503 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 29

Last updated 2026-07-28

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare two methods of delivering local dental anesthesia in undergraduate dental students: a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) system and a conventional dental syringe. The study evaluated whether the computer-controlled system reduced pain during the administration of local anesthesia compared with the conventional technique.

The main questions this study aimed to answer were:

Does a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system reduce pain during maxillary buccal infiltration compared with a conventional dental syringe? Are there differences in physiological responses (blood pressure, heart rate, and oxygen saturation) between the two anesthetic delivery methods? Which anesthetic delivery method do participants prefer after experiencing both techniques? Would participants recommend their preferred anesthetic delivery method to others? Participants attended two study visits approximately one week apart. Each participant received local anesthesia using both delivery methods in a randomized order, serving as his or her own control. Pain, dental anxiety, physiological parameters, anesthetic delivery preferences, and willingness to recommend the preferred method were assessed during the study.

Conditions

  • Anesthesia, Local

Interventions

DEVICE

Computer-Controlled Local Anesthetic Delivery System

Local anesthetic was administered using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) system with 2% lidocaine containing 1:100,000 epinephrine through a 27-gauge short dental needle for maxillary buccal infiltration anesthesia. The device controlled the flow rate throughout anesthetic administration according to the manufacturer's operating protocol.

DEVICE

Conventional Aspirating Dental Syringe

Local anesthetic was administered using a conventional aspirating dental syringe with 2% lidocaine containing 1:100,000 epinephrine through a 27-gauge short dental needle for maxillary buccal infiltration anesthesia. Anesthetic administration followed the conventional manual injection technique.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • University of Montemorelos

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Jose L Jimenez-Ortiz, DDS · Montemorelos University School of Dentistry

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
SINGLE
Model
CROSSOVER

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2025-09-02
Primary Completion
2025-12-02
Completion
2025-12-02

Countries

  • Mexico

Study Locations

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 NCT07731503 on ClinicalTrials.gov