Anesthetic Efficacy of Infiltration of Articaine

Anesthetic Efficacy of Buccal Infiltration of 4% Articaine compared to Block Injection with 2% Lidocaine for Extraction of Mandibular Primary Molars

Status

Recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

IRCT

Registry ID

IRCT20220129053868N1

Enrollment

100

Registered

2023-03-01

Start date

2023-02-27

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2023-03-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Anesthetic efficacy for extraction of mandibular primary molars.

Interventions

Intervention 1: Intervention group: buccal infiltration of 4% articaine epinephrine 1/200000(Dentacain 200, Exir Pharmaceutical Co.). Intervention 2: Control group: Block Injection with 2% Lidocaine e

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

4 Years to 8 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Having Mandibular Primary Molars that required extraction medically fit(ASA I,II) Mentally capable of communication A good understanding of Persian Having no history of pain or infection (abscess) or swelling

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Medically and mentally compromised children History of significant behaviour management problems Evidence of infection or abscess near the proposed injection site

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
The pain during treatment. Timepoint: After injection. Method of measurement: Frankl Behaviour Rating Scale(FBRS),Wong- Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (W-BFSR).	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
The Pain during the treatment. Timepoint: After tooth extraction. Method of measurement: Visual Analogue Scale.	—

Countries

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Contacts

Public ContactBornadokht Bazghandi

Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences

b.bornadokht@yahoo.com+98 21 8860 0098

Outcome results

None listed

Source: IRCT (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026