Effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in adult patients undergoing dental procedures: protocol for a systematic review

Local corticosteroid injection versus physical therapy for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The comparative effect of commonly used conservative treatments for carpal tunnel syndrome remained controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effect of local corticosteroid injection and physical therapy for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library was conducted to identify relevant randomized clinical trials published before 21st Mar 2023. Two independent reviewers assayed quality of included studies using the Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool. Relevant data were extracted and pooled analyses were conducted. Outcome measurements included Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire, visual analogue scale and some electrophysiology tests, while the former two were set as the primary outcomes. Subgroup analysis and sensitive analysis were performed and publication bias was evaluated. Heterogeneity among the included studies was examined using the I2 statistic. After selection, 12 studies were identified eligibility for inclusion. Only one study was found to have a high risk of bias. Pooled data of primary outcomes did not show any differences between treatments, and subgroup analysis supported the results. However, patients treated with local corticosteroid injection showed better improvement in distal motor latency (p = 0.002) and compound muscle action potential (p = 0.04). Some studies failed to pass the sensitive analysis, indicating the related analysis might be not so stable. A slight publication bias was observed in subgroup analysis of function scales, among three publication bias test. In conclusion, compared to physical therapy, local corticosteroid injection might have better treatment effects on carpal tunnel syndrome.

A cross-sectional survey of patient’s perception and knowledge of dental implants in Japan

Background

This study aimed to collect data regarding patient perception and knowledge of dental implants. It was conducted with the hope that the data would provide dental professionals and policymakers with a better understanding of ways to promote implant therapy.

Methods

 An anonymous online survey with 10 questions was distributed through 12 dental offices in Tokyo and provincial cities in Japan to assess patient perception and knowledge of dental implants. Harvard Medical School’s IRB approved this study.

Results

We collected data from 1172 patients (59% female, 41% male). The most common perceptions of implant therapy were that it was “expensive,” “advanced,” and “scary”. Patients’ implant knowledge came primarily from magazines or books, while professional dental societies/associations were the least sought out source of information. Patients believed that the purpose of dental implants was to avoid dentures and improve chewing function. Their primary concerns about dental implants were the cost and longevity. Approximately 12% of patients with dental implants and 61% of patients without implants did not know that bone grafts may be required and that sedation during surgery was an option. For patients who experienced sedation during the procedure, 60% of them want it for future surgeries. Patients also had limited knowledge of bone-graft materials and the effects of CBCT radiation; 75% of the patients expressed concerns over the safety of graft materials and radiation exposure. For patients with a history of dental implant therapy, 80% of them would recommend dental implants to their family and friends.

Conclusions

Overall, patients’ experiences with dental implant therapy were positive, but there was a lack of patient education regarding dental implants and their associated procedures. Dental professionals need to take the initiative to improve patient education.

Effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in adult patients undergoing dental procedures: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

It can be challenging to manage patients who are anxious during dental procedures. There is a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in adults. This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in patients undergoing dental procedures.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) compared the oral use of benzodiazepines and other medications with a placebo or other oral agents in adult patients. A search of the Cochrane (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (via Ovid) databases was conducted, without any restrictions on language or date of publication. The primary outcomes included the adverse effects and anxiety level. The secondary outcomes included sedation, satisfaction with the treatment, heart rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure and oxygen saturation. Reviewers, independently and in pairs, assessed each citation for eligibility, performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis of the data was provided.

RESULTS

A number of RCTs (n=327 patients) assessed the use of benzodiazepines (n=9) and herbal medicines (n=3). We found good satisfaction with treatment after the use of midazolam 7.5 mg or clonidine 150 µg and reduced anxiety with alprazolam (0.5 and 0.75 mg). Midazolam 15 mg promoted greater anxiety reduction than Passiflora incarnata L. 260 mg, while Valeriana officinalis 100 mg and Erythrina mulungu 500 mg were more effective than a placebo. More patients reported adverse effects with midazolam 15 mg. Diazepam 15 mg and V. officinalis 100 mg promoted less change in the heart rate and blood pressure than a placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the limitations of the findings due to the quality of the included studies and the different comparisons made between interventions, further RCTs are required to confirm the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in dentistry.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017057142.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine with midazolam for dental surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Dexmedetomidine and midazolam have become important approaches for the sedation of dental surgery. However, the comparison of these 2 drugs for the sedation of dental surgery has not been well established. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for dental surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials are searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the influence of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on dental surgery are included. Two investigators independently have searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. Meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Five RCTs and 420 patients are included in the meta-analysis. Compared with midazolam intervention for dental surgery, dexmedetomidine intervention has similar lowest SpO2, lowest heart rate and lowest systolic blood pressure, duration of surgery, and total volume of local anesthetic, but is associated with stable and reduced lowest diastolic blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar benefits of dexmedetomidine and midazolam intervention are observed for the sedation of dental surgery in terms of SpO2, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and the volume of local anesthetic, but dexmedetomidine may result in more stable diastolic blood pressure.

A case series analysing patients with dental anxiety: a patient-centered model based on psychological profiling

Anxiety and distress can jeopardize dental care experience of patients and may affect the clinical result. Although a wide range of sedation and analgesia techniques are currently available to relieve distress and pain during dental procedures, operative models to choose the most effective sedation-analgesic strategies are still insufficient.

This case series proposes a patient-centered model to optimize patients’ cooperation during dental care delivery. We describe how to achieve correct anaesthesia by using the least sedative procedure, accounting for the dental procedure needed and patient’s psychological profile.

Five patients were considered as paradigmatic to show the balance between patients’ subjective experiences and the clinical procedures: a patient with low stress, good compliance (case 1); a patient with moderate stress and reduction in compliance (case 2); anxious patient (case 3); a patient with acute anxiety and emotional distress (case 4); anguished patient (case 5).

A multimodal treatment of emotional and behavioural condition and a patient-centered model approach contributed to achieve the best patient satisfaction in the five cases detailed here.