None listed
Conditions
Interventions
Intervention1: LIDOCAINE 2%: To compare the efficacy of buccal, buccal plus palatal infiltration with 2% lidocaine and buccal infiltration with 4% articaine alone to achieve pulpal anaesthesia
Control
Sponsors
Department of Oral Health Science Centre
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: The inclusion criteria for the study were as follows: moderate to severe pain in the maxillary first molar, a prolonged response to cold testing with an ice stick and an electric pulp tester (Kerr Pulp Tester; Analytic Technology Corp, Redmond, WA), the absence of any periapical radiolucency on radiographs except for a widened periodontal ligament, a vital coronal pulp on access opening, and the ability of the subject to understand the use of pain scales. The subjects were in good health, and none were taking any medication that would alter pain perception, as determined by oral questioning and a written questionnaire.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: The exclusion criteria for the study were as follows: subjects younger than 18 years of age or older than 50 years of age, any known sensitivity to either 2% lidocaine or 4% articaine or epinephrine, patients having active pain in more than 1 maxillary molar, subject taking any pain-relieving medication including over-the-counter analgesics at least 12 hours before enrollment in the study, and swelling near the tooth in question and having a tooth not suitable for simple restorative treatment because of extensive caries or periodontal problems.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Buccal infiltration injection alone effective in the maxillary molars pulpal anesthesiaTimepoint: 2 hours | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 3. 4% articaine with adrenaline is more effective than 2% lidocaine with adrenaline as an infiltration anaestheticTimepoint: 2 hours | — |
Countries
India
Contacts
Public ContactUmesh KUMAR
Pgimer
Outcome results
None listed