This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Anusavice, K.J. Articles by Kincheloe, J.E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Anusavice, K.J. Articles by Kincheloe, J.E. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Medline Plus Health Information Pain Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Comparison of Pain Associated with Mechanical and Chemomechanical Removal of Caries

Department of Dental Biomaterials, J. Hillis Miller Health Center, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0446

J.E. Kincheloe

Department of Community Dentistry College of Dentistry, J. Hillis Miller Health Center, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0446

Previous studies have indicated that a chemomechanical caries removal system (CRS) has been effective in minimizing the use of conventional mechanical instruments and that it may reduce the need for local anesthesia. In the present study, a comparison of the pain experienced both during treatment with a chemomechanical technique and during conventional caries removal (control) was made for each of 47 patients who initially were not given a local anesthetic. One of two dentists was randomly selected to examine and treat patients with a matched pair of carious teeth, and each pair of teeth was treated in a randomized order with the CRS or control procedure.

Responses to the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) revealed a significantly higher level of pain (p <0.025) associated with the conventional treatment compared with the chemomechanical procedure. A significantly greater number of patients (p<0.05) requested local anesthetic for the tooth subjected to the control procedure than for the tooth subjected to the CRS procedure. However, 72.3% of the patients did not request local anesthesia for either treatment, although pain was experienced by these patients in 46.8% of the control teeth and 27.7% of the teeth which received the CRS treatment. Of the 20 pain descriptor categories listed on the MPQ, the sensory categories accounted for the greatest mean number of pain descriptors selected for both the CRS (4.4) and control procedures (8.0), compared with the mean number of descriptors selected from the affective pain categories for the CRS (0.8) and control procedures (1. 0). These results suggest that sensory pain factors are more important than affective pain factors in controlling the overall discomfort of patients and the need for local anesthetic during caries removal and subsequent restorative procedures.

REFERENCES

• Henschel, C.J. (1941): Pain Control Through Cold Control, Dent Digest 47:444-446.
• Lieber, K.L. (1946): Thermal Control Apparatus for Dental Drilling, J Am Dent Assoc 33:1117-1121.
• McCune, R.J. (1986): Report on a Symposium on Chemomechanical Caries Removal: A Multicenter Study, Compend Dent Educ 7:151-159.
• Melzack, R. (1983): The McGill Pain Questionnaire. In: Pain Measurement and Assessment, R. Melzack, Ed., New York: Raven Press, pp. 41-47.
• Melzack, R. and Torgerson, W.S. (1971): On the Language of Pain, Anesthesiology 34:50-59.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Schutzbank, S.G.; Galanini, J.; Kronman, J.H.; and Goldman, M. (1978): A Comparative in vitro Study of GK-101 and GK-101E in Caries Removal, J Dent Res 57:861-864.[Free Full Text]
• Siegel, S. (1956): The Case of Two Related Samples. In: Non-parametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, S. Siegel, Ed., New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, pp. 61-94.
• Taub, H.A.; Stuber, F.E.; Mitchell, J.N.; and McDade, G.C. (1985): Freedom of Choice for Restorative Dentistry with or without Anesthesia, J Prosthet Dent 54:15-18.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 66, No. 11, 1680-1683 (1987)
DOI: 10.1177/00220345870660111501


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. L. ALLEN, T. L. SALGADO, M. N. JANAL, and V. P. THOMPSON Removing carious dentin using a polymer instrument without anesthesia versus a carbide bur with anesthesia J Am Dent Assoc, May 1, 2005; 136(5): 643 - 651. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Anusavice, K.J. Articles by Kincheloe, J.E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Anusavice, K.J. Articles by Kincheloe, J.E. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Medline Plus Health Information Pain Social Bookmarking                         What's this?