RESUMO
Background/purpose: Horizontal bitewing radiographs are widely and frequently used in dentistry and are very reliable in diagnosing proximal caries and interproximal alveolar bone level. However, it is challengeable in detecting interproximal root caries, horizontal and/or vertical alveolar bone loss, and furcation involvements. The aim of this article was to assess the accuracy of vertical bitewing images in the diagnosis of caries and alveolar bone level compared to the horizontal bitewing technique. Materials and methods: Each one of the 20 patients had eight bitewing radiographs to get four horizontal bitewing (control) and four vertical bitewing (experimental) images for the same posterior area; a steel wire (3 mm) was used on the sensor plate to help measure the magnification later on. The radiographs were processed digitally and were evaluated for caries by two expert restorative specialists and for bone loss by two experienced periodontists. They were also compared to the "gold standard," which is using of both clinical and radiographic examination for diagnosis. They were blinded to each other during images evaluation. Results: Of the 20-patient sample size, 70% were male and 30% were female, with a mean age of 29.9. The average number of radiographs taken to achieve four standard bitewing radiographs was 5.9 ± 1.7 for vertical bitewings and 5.3 ± 1.3 for horizontal bitewing radiograph. The measurements from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the level of crestal bone didn't show a significant difference between the horizontal and vertical bitewing radiographs. The detection of furcation area in the molar teeth was much higher in the vertical bitewing (100%) compared to the horizontal bitewing (57.5%) (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: The vertical bitewing radiograph has the upper hand over the horizontal bitewing radiograph in the detection of furcation involvement, caries detection, and alveolar bone loss. Therefore, it is highly recommended to use vertical bitewing in caries and patients with periodontal disease rather than the conventional horizontal bitewing.
RESUMO
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of using DentalVibe during injection in comparison with the traditional injection technique, regarding pain and discomfort associated with buccal infiltration anesthesia (BIA) in pediatric patients. Method and materials: This randomized clinical trial included 6- to 12-year-old healthy children currently receiving nonurgent dental treatment on the maxillary arch that required BIA. In the control group, subjects received traditional BIA. In the test group, they received BIA with the aid of DentalVibe. A sample of 30 subjects per group was included. The mean⯱â¯SD age of the subjects was 9.18⯱â¯1.66â¯years. All the subjects were videotaped, and two trained and calibrated evaluators assessed the children's behaviors during the injection using the face, legs, activity, cry, consolability (FLACC) scale independently. Immediately after anesthesia administration, the subjects were administered the validated Arabic version of the Wong-Baker FACES scale ranging from 0 to 10. Results: Female subjects showed significantly higher mean FLACC and Wong-Baker FACES scale scores (2.20⯱â¯1.82 and 2.93⯱â¯3.05) compared with males (1.08⯱â¯1.37 and 1.12⯱â¯2.09) (Pâ¯=â¯.008 and Pâ¯=â¯.006, respectively). Multiple regression analysis showed that regardless of age and treatment group, females had significantly higher mean scores on the FLACC (ßâ¯=â¯1.63, Pâ¯=â¯.002) and the Wong-Baker FACES scales (ORâ¯=â¯4.44, Pâ¯=â¯.004) than males. Conclusion: The use of DentalVibe did not significantly affect pain, discomfort, or time during BIA among pediatric patients compared with the traditional technique. Female children were more likely to report higher pain and discomfort scores during BIA administration regardless of age and anesthesia administration technique.