Objective: To compare the anesthetic effect of a non commercial eutectic mixture of 4% lidocaine/ prilocaine (PLO 4%) and 20% benzocaine gel (Hurricaine?), as topical anesthetic, prior to inferior alveolar nerve block...Objective: To compare the anesthetic effect of a non commercial eutectic mixture of 4% lidocaine/ prilocaine (PLO 4%) and 20% benzocaine gel (Hurricaine?), as topical anesthetic, prior to inferior alveolar nerve block and buccal infiltration anesthe-sia in 5-12 year old children. Study design: Infiltrative anesthesia was applied in 50 children, divided in two groups (n = 25) using PLO 4% and Hurricaine? as topical anesthesia prior to infiltration. Physical reac-tions were registered using the Sound-Eyes- Motor Scale. Physiological changes expressed by ar-terial pressure and heart rate. Subjective pain re-sponse was scored on a Facial Image Scale. Physical physiological and subjective response was related to the type of topical anesthetic, age and sex using χ2 and Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Physical responses to puncture were similar and localized in the state of comfort with both anesthetics. Girls showed more ocular response than boys. Subjective pain perception and physiological reactions showed no anesthetic- or sex-related differences, except for heart rate before and after the procedure which was significantly higher in girls. Conclusions: PLO 4% showed the same capacity as Hurricaine? in reducing pain response to needle puncture. Girls expressed more needle puncture-related pain than boys. The young children showed most prior comfort and less discomfort to the puncture than older children.展开更多
文摘Objective: To compare the anesthetic effect of a non commercial eutectic mixture of 4% lidocaine/ prilocaine (PLO 4%) and 20% benzocaine gel (Hurricaine?), as topical anesthetic, prior to inferior alveolar nerve block and buccal infiltration anesthe-sia in 5-12 year old children. Study design: Infiltrative anesthesia was applied in 50 children, divided in two groups (n = 25) using PLO 4% and Hurricaine? as topical anesthesia prior to infiltration. Physical reac-tions were registered using the Sound-Eyes- Motor Scale. Physiological changes expressed by ar-terial pressure and heart rate. Subjective pain re-sponse was scored on a Facial Image Scale. Physical physiological and subjective response was related to the type of topical anesthetic, age and sex using χ2 and Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Physical responses to puncture were similar and localized in the state of comfort with both anesthetics. Girls showed more ocular response than boys. Subjective pain perception and physiological reactions showed no anesthetic- or sex-related differences, except for heart rate before and after the procedure which was significantly higher in girls. Conclusions: PLO 4% showed the same capacity as Hurricaine? in reducing pain response to needle puncture. Girls expressed more needle puncture-related pain than boys. The young children showed most prior comfort and less discomfort to the puncture than older children.
