Abstract：
BACKGROUND: To compare acceptance and preference of topical lidocaine gel anesthesia with articaine injection anesthesia in patients with moderate periodontitis undergoing scaling and root debridement.
METHODS: Ninety-one patients completed this randomized multicenter split-mouth controlled study and underwent two separate periodontal treatment sessions on different days, one with a topical intrapocket lidocaine gel application and the other with an articaine injection anesthesia in a different order depending on randomization. Parameters measured were the patients\' preference for topical lidocaine gel anesthesia or injection anesthesia with articaine (primary efficacy criterion), their maximum and average pain, and their intensity of numbness as well as experience of side effects; the probing depth; and the dentists\' preference and their evaluations of handling/application, onset and duration of anesthetic effect, and patient compliance.
RESULTS: After having experienced both alternatives, 58.3% of the patients preferred the topical lidocaine gel instillation into the periodontal pockets. The safety profile of the lidocaine gel differed positively from the safety profile of articaine injection in type and frequency of adverse drug reactions. The dentists\' acceptance and preference regarding either anesthetic method studied were balanced.
CONCLUSIONS: Instillation of lidocaine gel into the periodontal pocket is a preferred alternative to injection anesthesia for most of the patients and an equivalent alternative for dentists in nonsurgical periodontal therapy.
METHODS: Ninety-one patients completed this randomized multicenter split-mouth controlled study and underwent two separate periodontal treatment sessions on different days, one with a topical intrapocket lidocaine gel application and the other with an articaine injection anesthesia in a different order depending on randomization. Parameters measured were the patients\' preference for topical lidocaine gel anesthesia or injection anesthesia with articaine (primary efficacy criterion), their maximum and average pain, and their intensity of numbness as well as experience of side effects; the probing depth; and the dentists\' preference and their evaluations of handling/application, onset and duration of anesthetic effect, and patient compliance.
RESULTS: After having experienced both alternatives, 58.3% of the patients preferred the topical lidocaine gel instillation into the periodontal pockets. The safety profile of the lidocaine gel differed positively from the safety profile of articaine injection in type and frequency of adverse drug reactions. The dentists\' acceptance and preference regarding either anesthetic method studied were balanced.
CONCLUSIONS: Instillation of lidocaine gel into the periodontal pocket is a preferred alternative to injection anesthesia for most of the patients and an equivalent alternative for dentists in nonsurgical periodontal therapy.
摘要：
背景：比较中度牙周炎患者接受局部利多卡因凝胶麻醉和阿替卡因注射麻醉的接受度和偏好性。
方法：91名患者完成了这项随机多中心裂口对照研究，并在不同的日子接受了两次单独的牙周治疗，一种使用局部袋内利多卡因凝胶，另一种使用阿替卡因注射麻醉，顺序不同，具体取决于随机化。测量的参数是患者对局部利多卡因凝胶麻醉或阿替卡因注射麻醉的偏好（主要疗效标准），他们的最大和平均疼痛，和他们的麻木强度以及副作用的经验;探测深度;和牙医的偏好和他们的评估处理/应用,麻醉效果的起效和持续时间，和患者的依从性。
结果：在经历了两种选择之后，58.3％的患者更喜欢将局部利多卡因凝胶滴入牙周袋。利多卡因凝胶的安全性与阿替卡因注射液的安全性在药物不良反应的类型和频率上存在显著差异。牙医对所研究的两种麻醉方法的接受度和偏好是平衡的。
结论：将利多卡因凝胶滴入牙周袋是大多数患者注射麻醉的首选方法，也是牙周非手术治疗中牙医的等效方法。
方法：91名患者完成了这项随机多中心裂口对照研究，并在不同的日子接受了两次单独的牙周治疗，一种使用局部袋内利多卡因凝胶，另一种使用阿替卡因注射麻醉，顺序不同，具体取决于随机化。测量的参数是患者对局部利多卡因凝胶麻醉或阿替卡因注射麻醉的偏好（主要疗效标准），他们的最大和平均疼痛，和他们的麻木强度以及副作用的经验;探测深度;和牙医的偏好和他们的评估处理/应用,麻醉效果的起效和持续时间，和患者的依从性。
结果：在经历了两种选择之后，58.3％的患者更喜欢将局部利多卡因凝胶滴入牙周袋。利多卡因凝胶的安全性与阿替卡因注射液的安全性在药物不良反应的类型和频率上存在显著差异。牙医对所研究的两种麻醉方法的接受度和偏好是平衡的。
结论：将利多卡因凝胶滴入牙周袋是大多数患者注射麻醉的首选方法，也是牙周非手术治疗中牙医的等效方法。
