| Autor: |
Alameeri AA; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., AlShamsi HA; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., Murad A; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., Alhammadi MM; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., Alketbi MH; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., AlHamwi A; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., Rawi NHA; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., Kawas SA; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., Mohammed MM; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates., Shetty SR; Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. |
| Abstrakt: |
This systematic review evaluates current evidence regarding the feasibility of using needleless jet injection instead of a conventional local anesthetic needle. EBSCO, ProQuest, PubMed, and Scopus databases were used to identify relevant literature published in English from 2005 to 2020. Ten studies were selected. Five of them were randomized clinical trials, 3 case-control studies, and 2 equivalence trials. Using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist, 6 studies scored between 67% and 100%, and 4 studies scored between 34% and 66%. According to Jadad's scale, 2 studies were considered strong, and 8 studies were considered moderate in quality. The results of the 10 studies showed differences in patient preference for needleless jet injection. Needleless injection technique has been found to be particularly useful in uncooperative patients with anxiety and needle phobia. Needleless jet injection is not technique sensitive. However, with needleless jet anesthesia, most treatments require additional anesthesia. Conventional needle anesthesia is less costly, has a longer duration of action, and has better pain control during dental extraction. Needleless jet anesthesia has been shown to be moderately accepted by patients with a fear of needles, has a faster onset of action, and is an efficient alternative to conventional infiltration anesthesia technique. |
