An Evaluation of 10 Percent and 20 Percent Benzocaine Gels in Patients With Acute Toothaches: Efficacy, Tolerability and Compliance With Label Dose Administration Directions

Background The authors evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of 10 percent and 20 percent benzocaine gels compared with those of a vehicle (placebo) gel for the temporary relief of toothache pain. They also assessed the compliance with the label dose administration directions on the part of participants with toothache pain. Methods Under double-masked conditions, 576 participants self-applied study gel to an open tooth cavity and surrounding oral tissues. Participants evaluated their pain intensity and pain relief for 120 minutes. The authors determined the amount of gel the participants applied. Results The responders’ rates (the primary efficacy parameter), defined as the percentage of participants who had an improvement in pain intensity as exhibited by a pain score reduction of at least one unit on the dental pain scale from baseline for two consecutive assessments any time between the five- and 20-minute points, were 87.3 percent, 80.7 percent and 70.4 percent, respectively, for 20 percent benzocaine gel, 10 percent benzocaine gel and vehicle gel. Both benzocaine gels were significantly (P ≤ .05) better than vehicle gel; the 20 percent benzocaine gel also was significantly (P ≤ .05) better than the 10 percent benzocaine gel. The mean amount of gel applied was 235.6 milligrams, with 88.2 percent of participants applying 400 mg or less. Conclusions Both 10 percent and 20 percent benzocaine gels were more efficacious than the vehicle gel, and the 20 percent benzocaine gel was more efficacious than the 10 percent benzocaine gel. All treatments were well tolerated by participants. Practical Implications Patients can use 10 percent and 20 percent benzocaine gels to temporarily treat toothache pain safely

Is magnetic resonance imaging a viable alternative to ultrasound as the primary imaging modality in the diagnosis of paediatric appendicitis? A systematic review

YesBackground: Appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdominal pain requiring surgical intervention in paediatric patients. Ultrasound is generally the diagnostic imaging modality of choice, followed by CT, where paediatric appendicitis is suspected. However, high operator dependency and diagnostic restrictions related to anatomical and clinical presentation may limit consistency of application. This paper explores whether MRI is a viable alternative to ultrasound as the primary imaging modality. Method: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken. A search of Medline, Cinahl, PubMed Central and Google Scholar was undertaken supplemented by a review of reference lists, author searching and review of NICE evidence base for existing guidelines. Included studies were assessed for bias using the QUADAS-2 quality assessment tool and data were extracted systematically using a purposefully designed electronic data extraction proforma. Results: Seven studies were included in final review. The age range of participants extended from 0 to 19 years. Only one study with a patient age range of 0e14 used sedation. Sensitivity estimates from the included studies ranged from 92% to 100% while specificity ranged from 89% to 100%. A significant variation in the number and type of sequences was noted between the studies. Conclusion: MRI offers high sensitivity and specificity comparable to contrast enhanced CT and greater than ultrasound as reported in the literature. Where accessibility is not a restriction, MRI is a viable alternative to ultrasound in the assessment and diagnosis of paediatric appendicitis. Clinical practice recommendations have been provided to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice

Training adults and children with an autism spectrum disorder to be compliant with a clinical dental assessment using a TEACCH-based approach

The specific neuropsychological and sensory profile found in persons with autism spectrum disorders complicate dental procedures and as a result of this, most are treated under general anesthesia or unnecessary sedation. The main goal of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a short treatment and education of autistic and related communication-handicapped children-based intervention program (five sessions) to facilitate a 10-component oral assessment in children (n = 38, aged 4¿9 years) and adults (n = 34, aged 19¿41) with autism spectrum disorder (with or without associated intellectual disability). The assessment ranges from entering into the examination room to the evaluation of the dental occlusion. There were statistically significant differences in the number of components reached and in compliance before and after the training program