பல் மருத்துவம்

சுருக்கம்

To Assess the Prevalence of Dental Anxiety and Assess the Efficacy of Vibraject and to Assess Prevalence of Dental Phobia

Swapna Sreenivasagan*, Pendum Sneha, Poornima Ravi and Krishnakumar Raja VB

Background: Pain causes phobia. The most common reason for phobia is the injection required to achieve anesthesia which may lead to extreme anxiety. Vibraject is a novel invention that works on the principle of temporal summation of gate control theory and helps overcome the pain of injection.

Aim: To assess the prevalence of dental anxiety and to assess the efficacy of vibraject for extractions - A randomized control trial.

Subjects and Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted including 181 adult patients who reported to our OP for extraction with their informed consent. The dental fear was assessed based on questionnaire comprising of the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) and Kleinknecht's Dental Fear Survey (DFS). Split mouth technique was used. The study was undertaken by a single examiner using vibraject and conventional injection technique. Pain of injection procedure was assessed subjectively by VAS scale and was objectively confirmed by comparing their vitals with baseline vital signs during the process of injection using a finger Pulse oximeter and sphygmomanometer.

Results: 97% of the subjects are anxious towards treatment and 20% of the subjects were found to be highly anxious from the Modified dental anxiety survey. Seeing the needle and feeling of the injection has a high correlation (.524** 0.530 ** 0.756**) with the dental anxiety scores, thus indicating that trypanophobia is a significant factor for dental fear. Female patients of were more anxious by 79% and patients with previous history of treatment 87% with negative experience were more anxious than their counter part. Out of total study subject, 27 subjects reported increased pain score while using conventional injection technique than using vibraject. The p value for 2-tailed sign test shows (p=0.00001) there was significant difference between two techniques. Further studies will be needed to verify this.