Articaine

阿替卡因
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    研究利多卡因与肾上腺素局部麻醉的比较效果阿替卡因与肾上腺素在鼻内镜泪囊鼻腔吻合术(EN-DCR)中的应用。
    这项回顾性研究共包括180名患者。这些患者分为两组:利多卡因组,接受2%利多卡因(1:100,000肾上腺素),阿替卡因组,接受4%阿替卡因(1:100,000肾上腺素)局部麻醉。该研究比较了麻醉效果,术中疼痛水平,术中出血,以及两组之间心率和血压的差异。
    阿替卡因组与利多卡因组相比,显示出明显较低的视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛评分,测量在4.4±0.6厘米与5.0±1.0cm,分别为(P<0.0001)。此外,与利多卡因组相比,阿替卡因组表现出更高的麻醉效果(89.0%vs.76.6%,p=0.0487)。值得注意的是,与利多卡因组相比,阿替卡因组手术期间鼻粘膜出血较少(p=0.004).然而,两组患者血压、心率变化差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。
    这项研究表明,与EN-DCR中的2%利多卡因(1:100,000肾上腺素)相比,4%阿替卡因(1:100,000肾上腺素)具有更好的临床疗效。
    UNASSIGNED: To investigate the comparative effects of local anesthesia using lidocaine with adrenaline vs. articaine with adrenaline in endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (EN-DCR).
    UNASSIGNED: This retrospective study included a total of 180 patients. These patients were categorized into two groups: the lidocaine group, which received 2% lidocaine (1:100,000 adrenaline), and the articaine group, which received 4% articaine (1:100,000 adrenaline) for local anesthesia. The study compared anesthesia efficacy, intraoperative pain levels, intraoperative bleeding, as well as differences in heart rate and blood pressure between the two groups.
    UNASSIGNED: The articaine group demonstrated a significantly lower visual analog scale (VAS) pain score when compared to the lidocaine group, measuring at 4.4 ± 0.6 cm vs. 5.0 ± 1.0 cm, respectively (P < 0.0001). Additionally, the articaine group exhibited a higher anesthesia efficacy compared to the lidocaine group (89.0% vs. 76.6%, p = 0.0487). Notably, the articaine group experienced less nasal mucosal bleeding during the surgery in contrast to the lidocaine group (p = 0.004). However, there were no statistically significant differences in changes in blood pressure and heart rate between the two groups (p > 0.05).
    UNASSIGNED: This study demonstrated that 4% articaine (1:100,000 adrenaline) has superior clinical effectiveness in comparison to 2% lidocaine (1:100,000 adrenaline) in EN-DCR.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    简介氧化应激,活性氧(ROS)产生和抗氧化防御之间的不平衡,在各种牙科疾病中起着重要作用。局部麻醉药经常用于牙科。牙科局部麻醉药的潜在抗氧化活性可有助于牙科实践。因此,本研究旨在探讨三种常用的牙科局部麻醉药的ROS清除活性,利多卡因,丙胺卡因,还有阿替卡因,重点研究它们对羟基自由基(HO•)和超氧阴离子(O2•-)的影响。材料和方法采用电子自旋共振(ESR)自旋捕获技术来专门测量不同浓度下这些局部麻醉剂的ROS清除活性。结果利多卡因,丙胺卡因,阿替卡因表现出浓度依赖性HO·-清除活性,IC50值为0.029%,0.019%,和0.014%,分别。利多卡因和丙胺卡因显示浓度依赖性O2•-清除活性,IC50值为0.033%和0.057%,分别。然而,阿替卡因未清除O2•-。结论积极使用局部麻醉药可通过直接清除ROS减轻氧化损伤和炎症损伤。然而,需要进一步的研究来阐明这些牙科局部麻醉药抗氧化作用的具体机制,以及它们对与氧化应激相关的牙科疾病的潜在影响.
    Introduction Oxidative stress, an imbalance between reactive oxygen species (ROS) production and antioxidant defenses, plays an important role in various dental diseases. Local anesthetics are frequently used in dentistry. The potential antioxidant activity of dental local anesthetics can contribute to dental practice. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the ROS-scavenging activities of three commonly used dental local anesthetics, lidocaine, prilocaine, and articaine, focusing on their effects on hydroxyl radicals (HO•) and superoxide anions (O2 •-). Materials and methods The electron spin resonance (ESR) spin-trapping technique was employed to specifically measure the ROS-scavenging activities of these local anesthetics at varying concentrations. Results Lidocaine, prilocaine, and articaine exhibited concentration-dependent HO•-scavenging activities, with IC50 values of 0.029%, 0.019%, and 0.014%, respectively. Lidocaine and prilocaine showed concentration-dependent O2 •--scavenging activity, with IC50 values of 0.033% and 0.057%, respectively. However, articaine did not scavenge O2 •-. Conclusions The proactive use of dental local anesthetics may mitigate oxidative injury and inflammatory damage through direct ROS scavenging. However, further research is needed to elucidate the specific mechanisms underlying the antioxidant effects of these dental local anesthetics and their potential impact on the dental diseases associated with oxidative stress.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项研究的目的是比较4%阿替卡因的麻醉效果,0.5%布比卡因和0.5%罗哌卡因(1:200,000肾上腺素)在手术切除下颌第三磨牙时。
    该研究包括75名患者,随机分为3组,每组25名患者。研究变量是:麻醉作用的开始,手术时间和麻醉和术后镇痛。使用视觉模拟量表来评估不同时间间隔的疼痛。统计分析显示,在使用的麻醉溶液的体积方面,组间差异无统计学意义。麻醉质量,手术难度和手术持续时间。
    阿替卡因(1.14min)的平均起效时间明显短于(P<0.001)罗哌卡因(2.18min)和布比卡因(2.33min)。然而,与阿替卡因(232.8min和191.4min)相比,布比卡因(483.6min和464min)和罗哌卡因(426.6min和459min)的麻醉和镇痛持续时间明显(P<0.001)更长,分别。此外,三组术后6小时疼痛评分比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。
    罗哌卡因和布比卡因可安全用于预期手术持续时间较长的患者。
    UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine, 0.5% bupivacaine and 0.5% ropivacaine (with 1:200,000 adrenaline) during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars.
    UNASSIGNED: The study included 75 patients randomly divided into three equal groups of 25 patients each. The study variables were: onset of anesthetic action, duration of surgery and anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. A visual analog scale was used to assess pain at different time intervals. Statistical analysis revealed insignificant difference among groups in terms of volume of anesthetic solution used, quality of anesthesia, surgical difficulty and duration of surgery.
    UNASSIGNED: The mean onset time was significantly (P < 0.001) shorter for articaine (1.14 min) than ropivacaine (2.18 min) and bupivacaine (2.33 min). However, the duration of anesthesia as well as analgesia was significantly (P < 0.001) longer for bupivacaine (483.6 min and 464 min) and ropivacaine (426.6 min and 459 min) as compared to articaine (232.8 min and 191.4 min), respectively. Also, on comparing three groups pain scores at 6th postoperative hour were significant (P < 0.01).
    UNASSIGNED: Ropivacaine and bupivacaine can be safely used in patients where longer duration of surgery is anticipated.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本试验旨在研究阿替卡因在小儿牙髓治疗过程中的疼痛管理效果。
    方法:收集98例接受牙髓无痛治疗的患儿,随机分为对照组和观察组。每组49例。对照组采用利多卡因浸润麻醉,观察组采用阿替卡因浸润麻醉。麻醉效果,麻醉开始时间,感官恢复时间,麻醉持续时间,疼痛强度,血压,心率,并对不良反应进行比较。
    结果:观察组麻醉有效率高于对照组。麻醉起效时间和感觉恢复时间较短,麻醉持续时间较长,观察组VAS评分和面部表情评分均低于对照组。观察组的心率较低,舒张压高于对照组。观察组不良反应总发生率低于对照组。
    结论:在儿童牙髓疾病的治疗中,使用阿替卡因麻醉效果较好,麻醉起效快,对患者的血压和心率影响较小,但使用药物后也能缓解疼痛,安全性好。值得临床推广应用。
    OBJECTIVE: This trial aimed to study the efficacy of articaine in pain management during endodontic procedures in pediatric patients.
    METHODS: Ninety-eight children who received endodontic painless treatment were collected and randomly divided into the control group and observation group, with 49 cases in each group. The control group received infiltration anesthesia with lidocaine, and the observation group received infiltration anesthesia with articaine. Anesthesia effect, anesthesia onset time, sensory recovery time, duration of anesthesia, pain intensity, blood pressure, heart rate, and adverse reactions were compared.
    RESULTS: The effective rate of anesthesia in the observation group was higher than that in the control group. The anesthesia onset time and sensory recovery time were shorter, the duration of anesthesia was longer, and the VAS score and facial expression score were lower in the observation group than in the control group. The heart rate of the observation group was lower, and diastolic blood pressure was higher than those of the control group. The total incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was lower than that in the control group.
    CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of dental pulp diseases in children, the use of articaine can achieve better anesthesia effect and rapid onset of anesthesia and has less impact on the patient\'s blood pressure and heart rate, but it also can relieve pain and has good safety after the use of medication. It is worthy of clinical application.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项研究的目的是比较和评估小儿人群中2%利多卡因1:80,000肾上腺素和4%阿替卡因1:100,000肾上腺素的疼痛感觉和发作时间。
    对50名9-14岁需要下牙槽神经阻滞(IANB)麻醉的下颌弓双侧牙科治疗的儿童进行了一项裂口随机对照试验。即使在电浆测试(EPT)中施加了最大的电刺激,也没有报告感觉,记录发作时间。使用患者主观症状和面部评分的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估疼痛感知,腿,活动,哭泣,和由操作者评定的客观疼痛的舒适性(FLACC)量表。
    平均发作时间,疼痛-VAS,FLACC得分分别下降1.31、12.07和18.39%,分别在4%阿替卡因中与2%利多卡因相比,但差异没有达到统计学意义(p>0.05),也就是说,发现统计上是相同的。总之,可以推断,4%阿替卡因的使用与2%利多卡因溶液一样有效,但在儿童中显示麻醉起效和疼痛体验稍好,尽管结果无统计学意义.
    局部麻醉(LA)是儿科实践中疼痛管理的主要方法之一,因此必须选择起效时间较短且给药疼痛较少的LA药物。
    SinghSS,2%利多卡因和4%阿替卡因在小儿下牙槽神经阻滞中的疼痛经历和发作时间的比较评估:一项临床研究。IntJClinPediatrDent2024;17(1):67-71。
    UNASSIGNED: The objective of this research was to conduct a comparison and evaluate the pain perception and time of onset of 2% lignocaine 1:80,000 epinephrine with 4% articaine 1:100,000 epinephrine in the pediatric population.
    UNASSIGNED: A split-mouth randomized control trial was conducted on 50 children aged 9-14 years who required inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) anesthesia for bilateral dental treatment in the mandibular arch. The time of onset was recorded when no sensation was reported even when maximum electrical stimulus was applied in an electric pulp testing (EPT). The pain perception was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) rated by the patient for subjective symptoms and face, legs, activity, cry, and consolability (FLACC) scale for objective pain rated by the operator.
    UNASSIGNED: The mean onset of time, pain-VAS, and FLACC score decreased by 1.31, 12.07, and 18.39%, respectively in 4% articaine as compared to 2% lignocaine but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05), that is, found to be statistically the same.In conclusion, it can be inferred that the utilization of 4% articaine is as potent as 2% lignocaine solution but showed slightly better onset of anesthesia and pain experience among the children although the findings were not statistically significant.
    UNASSIGNED: Local anesthesia (LA) is one of the main methods of pain management in pediatric practice which makes it essential to choose an LA agent with a shorter time of onset and less pain on administration.
    UNASSIGNED: Singh SS, Koul M. A Comparative Evaluation of Pain Experience and Time of Onset of 2% Lignocaine and 4% Articaine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block among Pediatric Population: A Clinical Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024;17(1):67-71.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    无法通过标准口腔浸润实现完全牙髓麻醉,尤其是在SIP用于上颌牙的情况下。该研究旨在比较使用2%利多卡因和4%阿替卡因在永久性上颌第一磨牙中的颊和颊加pal浸润技术的麻醉效果,并诊断为有症状的不可逆性牙髓炎(SIP)。
    临床诊断为SIP的123例患者,18~50岁的患者被随机分配到3个治疗组(N=41).第1组(BIL):使用2%利多卡因和1:80,000肾上腺素的口腔浸润技术。第2组(BPIL):使用2%利多卡因和1:80,000肾上腺素的颊部+腭部浸润的组合。第3组(BIA):使用4%阿替卡因和1:100,000肾上腺素的口腔浸润。在龋齿去除期间的牙髓手术期间,在局部麻醉给药之前和之后记录患者的疼痛强度。使用Heft-Parker视觉模拟量表(HP-VAS)进行访问准备和纸浆去除。成功定义为牙髓手术期间的“无痛(0mm)”或“轻度疼痛(0-54mm)”。使用卡方检验分析麻醉有效率,使用单向方差分析的年龄差异。
    最终分析共包括117名患者。与I组(69%)和III组(74%)相比,II组(85%)的成功率更高,但差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。我们的结果表明,所有三组的性别之间没有显着差异(p>0.05)。
    使用颊加腭浸润和4%阿替卡因可以为上颌第一磨牙SIP患者提供有效的麻醉作为标准颊浸润和2%利多卡因。
    UNASSIGNED: The inability in achieving complete pulpal anesthesia with standard buccal infiltration especially in cases with SIP used for maxillary teeth. The study aimed to compare the anesthetic efficacy of buccal and buccal plus palatal infiltration technique using 2% lidocaine and 4% articaine in permanent maxillary first molars with the diagnosis of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP).
    UNASSIGNED: One hundred and twenty-three patients with clinical diagnosis of SIP, aged 18-50 years were randomly allocated to three treatment groups (N = 41). Group 1(BIL): Buccal infiltration technique using 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline. Group 2(BPIL): combination of buccal plus palatal infiltration using 2% Lidocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline. Group 3(BIA): Buccal infiltration using 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline. Pain intensity of patients were recorded before and after the administration of local anesthesia during endodontic procedure that is during caries removal, access preparation and pulp removal using Heft-Parker Visual Analog Scale (HP-VAS). Success was defined by \"no pain (0 mm)\" or \"mild pain (0-54 mm)\" during endodontic procedure. The anesthetic efficacy rates were analyzed using chi-square tests, age differences using one-way ANOVA.
    UNASSIGNED: The final analysis included total of 117 patients. Higher success was observed in group II (85%) in comparison to group I (69%) and group III (74%), but the difference was statistically nonsignificant (p > 0.05). Our results demonstrated a nonsignificant difference between genders in all three groups (p > 0.05).
    UNASSIGNED: The use of buccal plus palatal infiltration and 4% articaine can provide effective anesthesia as standard buccal infiltration and 2% lidocaine for patients with SIP in maxillary first molars.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Randomized Controlled Trial
    目的:上颌下颌磨牙拔除的腭注射的绝对必要性从未被探索过,尽管众所周知,儿童不能很好地耐受向腭组织注射局部麻醉剂。这项研究的目的是分别比较在麻醉和上颌原发性磨牙拔牙后,使用不同的麻醉溶液和不同的麻醉后等待时间,在没有pal注射的情况下对疼痛的感知。
    方法:在78名参与者中进行了一项单盲随机对照研究(26例上颚麻醉患者(对照组),和26例患者5分钟和26例患者在麻醉后等待8分钟而没有pal麻醉(研究组))。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)和Wong-Baker面孔疼痛评定量表(WBS)分别评估麻醉和拔牙后的主观疼痛经历。
    结果:就麻醉后获得的VAS评分而言,组间差异有统计学意义(p<0.05)。据报道,无pal麻醉组的VAS疼痛评分低于pal麻醉组。两组拔牙后VAS和Wong-Baker评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。
    结论:虽然在接受腭部麻醉的组中,麻醉后报告的疼痛更高,拔牙后报告的疼痛在两组之间没有差异。
    结论:通过将4%阿替卡因或2%利多卡因注射到牙齿的颊前庭中,等待时间为5或8分钟,可以在没有腭注射的情况下拔除上颌初级磨牙。
    OBJECTIVE: The absolute necessity of a palatal injection for the extraction of primary maxillary molars has never been explored, despite the fact that it is widely known that children do not tolerate local anesthetic injections into the palatal tissue well. The aim of this study was to compare separately the perception of pain in the absence of palatal injection after anesthesia and maxillary primary molar tooth extraction using different anesthetic solutions and different post-anesthetic waiting times.
    METHODS: A single-blinded randomized controlled study was conducted in 78 participants (26 patients with palatal anesthesia (the control groups), and 26 patients with 5 min and 26 patients with 8 min post-anesthetic waiting time without palatal anesthesia (the study groups)). Subjective experiences of pain were evaluated separately after anesthesia and tooth extraction using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBS).
    RESULTS: In terms of VAS scores obtained following administration of anesthesia, there was a statistically significant difference between the groups (p<0.05). VAS pain scores were reported to be lower in the groups without palatal anesthesia than in the groups with palatal anesthesia. No statistically significant difference was observed in VAS and Wong-Baker scores after tooth extraction between the groups with and without palatal anesthesia (P>0.05).
    CONCLUSIONS: While the pain reported following administration of anesthesia was found to be higher in the groups receiving palatal anesthesia, no difference was found between the groups in the pain reported after tooth extraction.
    CONCLUSIONS: Extraction of maxillary primary molars is possible without palatal injection by injecting 4% articaine or 2% lidocaine into the buccal vestibule of the tooth with a waiting time of 5 or 8 min.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    进行了这项系统的荟萃分析,以评估局部麻醉药用于颞下颌关节腔缓解疼痛和增加下颌活动度的有效性。纳入随机对照试验,对报告发表日期没有限制。最终搜索于2023年10月15日进行,使用美国国家图书馆提供的引擎。比勒费尔德大学,和爱思唯尔出版社。使用Cochrane偏差风险2工具评估偏差风险。表和图表中总结了关节疼痛和下颌骨外展值及其平均差异。对总共252名患者的8项研究评估阿替卡因的关节内给药,布比卡因,利多卡因,和甲哌卡因纳入系统评价.所有符合条件的研究均未在任何评估领域中呈现高偏倚风险。关节内布比卡因的镇痛效果观察到长达24小时。在长期随访中,与基线值和安慰剂组相比,量化疼痛没有统计学上的显着变化,无论使用哪种麻醉剂(阿替卡因,布比卡因,和利多卡因)。没有科学证据表明关节内局部麻醉对下颌骨运动范围的影响。因此,在目前的知识状态下,局部麻醉药进入颞下颌关节腔只能被认为是一种短期的疼痛缓解措施。
    This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of local anesthetic administration into temporomandibular joint cavities in relieving pain and increasing mandibular mobility. Randomized controlled trials were included with no limitation on report publication dates. Final searches were performed on 15 October 2023, using engines provided by the US National Library, Bielefeld University, and Elsevier Publishing House. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Articular pain and mandible abduction values and their mean differences were summarized in tables and graphs. Eight studies on a total of 252 patients evaluating intra-articular administration of articaine, bupivacaine, lidocaine, and mepivacaine were included in the systematic review. None of the eligible studies presented a high risk of bias in any of the assessed domains. An analgesic effect of intra-articular bupivacaine was observed for up to 24 h. In the long-term follow-up, there were no statistically significant changes in quantified pain compared to both the baseline value and the placebo group, regardless of the anesthetic used (articaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine). There is no scientific evidence on the effect of intra-articular administration of local anesthesia on the range of motion of the mandible. Therefore, in the current state of knowledge, the administration of local anesthetics into the temporomandibular joint cavities can only be considered as a short-term pain relief measure.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • DOI:
    文章类型: Journal Article
    尽管局部麻醉药(LA)的大部分代谢发生在肝脏中,尚无研究调查这些麻醉药对单肾人类或动物肾功能的影响。本研究旨在研究LAs对单肾大鼠肾功能的影响。
    本实验动物研究与两个对照组在动物实验室中进行。将42只大鼠随机分为7组,每组6只,包括两个对照组和五个实验组。实验组采用2%利多卡因腹腔麻醉,2%利多卡因加1:80,000肾上腺素,4%阿替卡因,3%丙胺卡因加0.03IU非利压素,和3%甲哌卡因,分别。进行单侧肾切除术。24小时后,大鼠血尿素氮(BUN),血清肌酐(Cr),测量血液比重(BSG)。随后将标准剂量的麻醉剂注射到腹膜中4天。然后,最后一次注射后24小时再次测量这些指数。使用IBMSPSS(21.0版)分析数据。单向方差分析,Tukey的诚实显著差异事后,并采用配对t检验进行统计学分析。P<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
    结果表明,肾切除术后24h大鼠BUN和血清Cr组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。然而,BUN没有显着差异,BSG,干预后各组之间的Cr。
    LA不影响单肾大鼠的肾功能。因此,牙医可以在单肾型患者中使用麻醉剂。
    UNASSIGNED: Although most of the metabolism of local anesthetics (LAs) takes place in the liver, no study has investigated the effect of these anesthetics on the kidney function of single-kidney humans or animals. The present study was conducted to examine the effect of LAs on renal function in single-kidney rats.
    UNASSIGNED: The present experimental animal study with two control groups was done in an animal laboratory. Forty-two rats were randomly assigned to seven groups of six rats, including two control groups and five experimental groups. The experimental groups underwent intraperitoneal anesthesia with 2% lidocaine, 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine, 4% articaine, 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU Felypressin, and 3% mepivacaine, respectively. Unilateral nephrectomy was done. After 24 h, the rats\' blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum creatinine (Cr), and blood specific gravity (BSG) were measured. A standard dose of anesthetics was injected into the peritoneum for 4 days afterward. Then, these indices were measured again 24 h after the last injection. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS (version 21.0). One-way analysis of variance, Tukey\'s honestly significant difference post hoc, and paired t-tests were used for statistical analysis. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
    UNASSIGNED: The results indicated significant differences among groups in the rats\' BUN and serum Cr 24 h after nephrectomy (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in BUN, BSG, and Cr among groups after the interventions.
    UNASSIGNED: LAs did not affect renal function in single-kidney rats. Therefore, dentists can use the anesthetics in single-kidney people.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究旨在探讨瑞士儿科牙医在使用阿替卡因及其他局部和局部麻醉方面的偏好和经验。
    方法:进行了18个问题的调查,试点,并分发给瑞士儿科牙科协会的成员(n=460)。收集了以下信息:不同年龄段使用最多的局部麻醉药,注射一个完整的安瓿所需的时间,观察到的局部和全身副作用的频率,注射前局部麻醉的应用,在应用和注射之间等待的时间,以及局部麻醉的有效性。使用逻辑回归分析牙医的反应,报告比值比(OR)和5%的95%置信区间(CI)。
    结果:在发送的460份问卷中,答复率为37%(n=168),响应者主要是女性(67%)和平均47岁。在所有年龄组中,超过80%的牙医使用阿替卡因。45%的反应者注射完整的安瓿需要超过60秒的时间。分别有82%和28%的受访者观察到局部和全身副作用,尽管由于问卷的匿名性,这些问卷的性质和意义没有详细说明。年龄较大的儿童(p=0.04)和经验较多的牙医(p=0.01)的局部不良反应明显较少。大多数响应者使用局部麻醉剂,其中一半在注射前等待了60秒以上。
    结论:阿替卡因是瑞士儿科牙医研究小组广泛使用的局部麻醉药,无论患者年龄如何。注射前使用局部麻醉剂是具有良好感知效果的常见做法。
    OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to explore the preference and experience of paediatric dentists based in Switzerland regarding the use of articaine and other local and topical anaesthesia.
    METHODS: An 18-question survey was developed, piloted, and distributed to the members of the Swiss association of paediatric dentistry (n = 460). The following information were collected: most used local anaesthetic in different age groups, time needed to inject a full ampule, frequency of observed local and systemic side effects, application of topical anaesthetic prior to injection, time waited between application and the injection, and perceived effectiveness of topical anaesthetic. The dentists\' responses were analysed with logistic regressions reporting odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) at 5%.
    RESULTS: The response rate was 37% (n = 168) out of the 460 questionnaires sent, with the responders being predominantly female (67%) and 47-year-old on average. More than 80% of the dentists used articaine in all age groups. 45% of responders took longer than 60 s to inject a full ampule. Local and systemic side-effects were observed by 82% and 28% of respondents respectively, although the nature and the significance of those were not detailed due to the anonymous nature of the questionnaire. Significantly less local adverse effects were seen for older children (p = 0.04) and among dentists with more years of experience (p = 0.01). Most responders applied topical anaesthetic and half of them waited longer than 60 s before injection.
    CONCLUSIONS: Articaine is a widely used local anaesthetic by the studied group of Swiss paediatric dentists regardless of patient\'s age. The use of topical anaesthetic before injection is a common practice with good perceived effectiveness.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号