Objectives. To compare the effectiveness of the topical administration of benzocaine and EMLA on oral pain and tactile sensitivity. Materials and Methods. A randomized, double-blind, split-mouth clinical trial was carried out with 20 volunteers. e sensorial and quantitative tests were applied before the contact with topical anesthetic and after the application. Results. In the superficial tactile perception test, when we compared each group singly, there were statistically significant values in the decrease of superficial tactile perception when compared to the moment prior to the application of anesthetic agents. For the sensitivity to mechanical pain, no statistical significant difference was observed at evaluated times. In the needle penetration test, in an intergroup analysis, we found a decrease in the pain sensitivity to needle penetration at 5 min (p � 0.053) and at 10 min (p � 0.019) after the contact of the anesthetic drug with the oral mucosa. Conclusion. e application of topical anesthetic drugs reduces the discomfort associated with this procedure, mainly until the first 10 minutes. Only the needle penetration sensitivity test showed sufficient sensitivity to reveal a difference in the anesthetic effect between EMLA and benzocaine. is trial is registered with RBR-2N2GSW.

This paper presents a multi-temporal comparison of high-resolution 3D digital models from two urban areas susceptible to landslides in three time periods. The study areas belong to the São Paulo landslide risk mapping database and are named “CEU Paz” (CP) and “Parque Santa Madalena I” (PSM). For each area, a lidar digital surface model (DSM) (2017) and two structure-from-motion multi-view stereo DSMs (2019 and 2022) built from drone imagery were combined using raster algebra to generate three digital surface models of differences (DoDs). The DoDs were able to highlight changes in vegetation cover and buildings, which are important characteristics for evaluating geological risks in an urban context. Still, they were unable to highlight changes in the ground surface. The results demonstrate that the method greatly supports monitoring, allowing for greater detail and ease of detecting large-scale changes. Even with promising results, this technique should be understood as one more tool for mapping risk areas without replacing fieldwork.