Anesthetic efficacy of the palatal-anterior superior alveolar injection

Journal of the American Dental Association

Volumn 135, Issue 9, 2004, Pages 1269-1276

  Burns, Yvette ^a,b   Reader, A L ^a   Nusstein, John ^a   Beck, Mike ^a   Weaver, Joel ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADRENALIN; ANESTHETIC AGENT; LIDOCAINE; MEPIVACAINE; PROCAINE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANINE TOOTH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INCISOR; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TOOTH PULP;

EID: 4944250212     PISSN: 00028177     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2004.0402     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Friedman MJ, Hochman MN. P-ASA block injection: a new palatal technique to anesthetize maxillary anterior teeth. J Esthet Dent 1999;1(2):63-71.
2. Friedman MJ, Hochman MN. Using AMSA and P-ASA nerve blocks for esthetic restorative dentistry. Gen Dent 2001;49:506-11.
3. Malamed, SF. Handbook of local anesthesia. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1997:148, 150, 160, 180.
4. The Wand Plus computer controlled anesthetic delivery system, 2000. Product information guide. Deerfield, Ill.: Milestone Scientific, Dental Division; 2000.
5. Hochman M, Chiarello D, Hochman CB, Lopatkin R, Pergola S. Computerized local anesthetic delivery vs. traditional syringe technique. Subjective pain response. N Y State Dent J 1997;63(7):24-9.
6. Levato C. Giving the Wand a shot. Dent Pract Finance 1998;6(5):53-7.
7. Asarch T, Allen K, Petersen B, Beiraghi S. Efficacy of a computerized local anesthesia device in pediatric dentistry. Pediatr Dent 1999;21:421-4.
8. Saloum FS, Baumgartner JC, Marshall G, Tinkle J. A clinical comparison of pain perception to the Wand and a traditional syringe. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;86:691-5.
9. Goodell GG, Gallagher FJ, Nicoll BK. Comparison of a controlled injection pressure system with a conventional technique. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;90(1):88-94.
10. Gibson RS, Allen K, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S. The Wand vs. traditional injection: a comparison of pain related behaviors. Pediatr Dent 2000;22:458-62.
11. Nicholson JW, Berry TG, Summitt JB, Yuan CH, Witten TM. Pain perception and utility: a comparison of the syringe and computerized local injection techniques. Gen Dent 2001;49(2):167-73.
12. Tan PY, Vukasin P, Chin ID, et al. The WAND local anesthetic delivery system: a more pleasant experience for anal anesthesia. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:686-9.
13. Rosenberg ES. A computer-controlled anesthetic delivery system in a periodontal practice: patient satisfaction and acceptance. J Esthet Restor Dent 2002;14(1):39-46.
14. Primosch RE, Brooks R. Influence of anesthetic flow rate delivered by the Wand Local Anesthetic System on pain response to palatal injections. Am J Dent 2002;15(1):15-20.
15. True RH, Elliott RM. Microprocessor-controlled local anesthesia versus the conventional syringe technique in hair transplantation. Dermatol Surg 2002;28:463-8.
16. Allen KD, Kotil D, Larzelere RE, Hutfless S, Beiraghi S. Comparison of a computerized anesthesia device with a traditional syringe in preschool children. Pediatr Dent 2002;24:315-20.
17. McLean C, Reader A, Beck M, Meryers WJ. An evaluation of 4% prilocaine and 3% mepivacaine compared with 2% lidocaine (1:100,000 epinephrine) for inferior alveolar nerve block. J Endod 1993;19(3):146-50.
18. Cohen HP, Cha BY, Spangberg LS. Endodontic anesthesia in mandibular molars: a clinical study. J Endod 1993;19:370-3.
19. Dreven LJ, Reader A, Beck M, Meyers WJ, Weaver J. An evaluation of an electric pulp tester as a measure of analgesia in human vital teeth. J Endod 1987;13:233-8.
20. Certosimo AJ, Archer RD. A clinical evaluation of the electricpulp tester as an indicator of local anesthesia. Oper Dent 1996;21(1):25-30.