Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorOcak, H.
dc.contributor.authorAkkoyun, Emine Fulya
dc.contributor.authorÇolpak, Halis Ali
dc.contributor.authorDemetoğlu, Umut
dc.contributor.authorYücesoy, Türker
dc.contributor.authorKılıç, Ertuğrul
dc.contributor.authorAlkan, Arzu
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-19T21:16:08Z
dc.date.available2021-02-19T21:16:08Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn2468-8509
dc.identifier.issn2468-7855
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2019.05.001
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12868/257
dc.descriptionWOS: 000510009200005en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 31077857en_US
dc.description.abstractPain control is achieved typically by means of injection of local anesthesia for invasive procedures to carry out procedures with as little pain or discomfort as possible. Although this method is highly effective, patients often fear more from the sight of a needle during administration of local anesthetic than from the treatment. Therefore, needleless local anesthesia with a jet injection device has been proposed. With the INJEX (R), anesthetic solution is forced under high pressure into the oral mucosa, leading to mechanical infiltration of the compound through the mucosa. With this study, we aimed to show the effectiveness of the needleless injection for infiltrative anesthesia and compare the acceptance and efficacy between jet injection with INJEX and local infiltration anesthesia. 28 adult patients admitted to our department for tooth extraction were included in the study. Two symmetrical teeth in the same jaw were extracted from each of the patients. Jet injection with the INJEX (R) was performed on one side and classical (needle) infiltration anesthesia on the other side with 0.3 cc Ultracain DS forte (Sanofi Aventis, Istanbul, Turkiye) on buccal and lingual aspects and 0.1 cc on palatal aspects of the teeth. The difference between pain and discomfort scores experienced during tooth extraction was statistically significant (P = 0.026). Accordingly, the pain or discomfort score of the INJEX (R) method during tooth extraction was significantly higher. Jet injection with the INJEX (R) was not found to be effective for local infiltrative anesthesia especially teeth extractions. It may be more acceptable when using for previously classical local infiltration anesthesia by patients. The main problem with jet injection was the "pop" sound when the INJEX (R) device was pressed, and also inadequate suppyling the anesthesia. (C) 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectLocal anaesthesia procedureen_US
dc.subjectNeedleless injcetion, INJEX systemen_US
dc.subjectTooth extractionen_US
dc.titleIs the jet injection effective for teeth extraction?en_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentALKÜen_US
dc.contributor.institutionauthor0-belirlenecek
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jormas.2019.05.001
dc.identifier.volume121en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage19en_US
dc.identifier.endpage24en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Stomatology Oral And Maxillofacial Surgeryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster