Digital vs. Conventional Anesthesia for Primary Tooth Extractions in Pediatric Patients
NCT ID: NCT07087028
Last Updated: 2025-07-25
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
20 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2020-01-20
2022-01-02
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Pain and Anxiety in Pediatric Dentistry: Computer-Controlled vs. Traditional Anesthesia
NCT07156487
Comparison of Pain Perception in A Group of Pediatric Patients Undergoing Maxillary Primary Molar Extraction Using A Novel Anesthetic Device Versus Traditional Infiltration
NCT07124052
Effectiveness of Digital Anesthesia Versus Conventional Techniques in Reducing Pain and Anxiety in Children
NCT06992193
Pain and Anxiety Levels of Sleeperone Electronic Anesthesia System in Pediatric Patients
NCT06340022
Comparison of the Effects of Intraosseous Anesthesia Performed With the SleeperOne5 Computer-Controlled Device and Conventional Mandibular Nerve Block on Behavior and Pain Control During Anesthesia Administration in Children Aged 5-9
NCT07198997
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
CCLAD, particularly intraosseous anesthesia systems like SleeperOne™, offer a controlled flow rate and pressure during anesthesia delivery, potentially reducing discomfort and anxiety. Despite numerous studies, results on the effectiveness of CCLAD in pediatric patients remain controversial. This study aims to bridge this gap by comparing the efficacy of computerized intraosseous anesthesia with conventional infiltration anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing primary molar extraction. The goal is to assess pain perception and anxiety levels, with the hypothesis that intraosseous anesthesia may lead to better outcomes in terms of pain and anxiety reduction compared to conventional techniques.
The use of the SleeperOne™ device for intraosseous anesthesia is hypothesized to be more effective in reducing pain and anxiety compared to conventional infiltration techniques during the extraction of primary molars in children.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
FIRST Computerized Intraosseous Anesthesia (CCIA), SECOND Traditional Infiltration Anesthesia (TIA)
In this randomized split-mouth crossover design, participants underwent two appointments for bilateral upper primary molar extractions. In this arm, at the first visit, computerized intraosseous anesthesia (CCIA) was administered using the SleeperOne™ system with a 30 G × 9 mm Effitec needle and 2% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, followed by tooth extraction. At the second visit, conventional buccal infiltration anesthesia (TIA) was performed using a standard dental syringe and a 27-gauge needle on the contralateral molar, using the same anesthetic solution.
SleeperOne™
Computerized intraosseous anesthesia was delivered using the SleeperOne™ (Dental HiTec, France) device with a 30 G × 9 mm Effitec needle at a 15° angle to the mucosa. A total of 2 mL 2% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine was administered per site.
Conventional Infiltration Anesthesia
The intervention for the Conventional Infiltration Anesthesia involves the manual administration of a local anesthetic using a standard dental syringe with a fine-gauge needle.
FIRST Traditional Infiltration Anesthesia (TIA), SECOND (CCIA)
In this randomized split-mouth crossover design, participants underwent two appointments for bilateral upper primary molar extractions. In this arm, at the first visit, conventional buccal infiltration anesthesia (TIA) was administered using a standard dental syringe and a 27-gauge needle, along with 2% articaine containing 1:100,000 epinephrine. At the second visit, computerized intraosseous anesthesia (CCIA) was delivered using the SleeperOne™ system with a 30 G × 9 mm Effitec needle, followed by extraction of the contralateral molar using the same anesthetic solution.
SleeperOne™
Computerized intraosseous anesthesia was delivered using the SleeperOne™ (Dental HiTec, France) device with a 30 G × 9 mm Effitec needle at a 15° angle to the mucosa. A total of 2 mL 2% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine was administered per site.
Conventional Infiltration Anesthesia
The intervention for the Conventional Infiltration Anesthesia involves the manual administration of a local anesthetic using a standard dental syringe with a fine-gauge needle.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
SleeperOne™
Computerized intraosseous anesthesia was delivered using the SleeperOne™ (Dental HiTec, France) device with a 30 G × 9 mm Effitec needle at a 15° angle to the mucosa. A total of 2 mL 2% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine was administered per site.
Conventional Infiltration Anesthesia
The intervention for the Conventional Infiltration Anesthesia involves the manual administration of a local anesthetic using a standard dental syringe with a fine-gauge needle.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Physically and mentally healthy patients
* Cooperative patients who were rated as positive or definitely positive according to the Frankl behavior classification scale
* Patients who had primary molars that required extraction on both sides of maxillary arch.
Exclusion Criteria
* Medically compromised and special children
* Teeth with hypoplasia
* Children who used analgesic drug 48 hours before treatment
6 Years
12 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Ege University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Özant Önçağ
Professsor
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Ege University
Izmir, , Turkey (Türkiye)
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
16-3/7
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.