Children’s and Adolescents’ Pain, Discomfort, Fear, Cooperation, and Parental Presence During Dental Extractions

Krekmanova, Larisa; Robertson, Agneta

doi:10.32474/ipdoaj.2020.05.000202

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding extractions, 41-56% of all 3-19-year-olds rated themselves as experiencing some degree of fear, which is considered noteworthy. The findings are in congruence with previous studies, indicating that preventive measures to minimize young patients' DFA have not yet reached the desired outcome (Cianetti et al 2017;Ghanei et al 2018;Krekmanova and Robertson 2020).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Despite experiencing fear, children and adolescents often cooperate during dental procedures, such as examinations, restorations, or extractions (Ghanei et al 2018;Krekmanova et al 2009;Krekmanova and Robertson 2020). However, some children and adolescents have difficulty to interrupt and stop an ongoing dental treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patient cooperation in the long run may positively reinforce the relation with the dental team. Based on the above, dental professionals should identify DFA while treating young patients (Klingberg 1995;Krekmanova et al 2009;Krekmanova et al 2009;Krekmanova and Robertson 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Young patients’ self-reported fear compared to professionals’ assessments during invasive and non-invasive dental visits: a prospective, longitudinal study

Krekmanova

Sotirianou

Sabel

2022

Eur Arch Paediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The main purpose was to study young patients’ self-reports on dental fear over a 5-year period, prospectively. Also, to compare these to professionals’ proxy reports for dental fear during invasive and non-invasive dental visits. The research question was, to what extent the self-reports and dental professionals’ proxy reports are congruent, and if there were patient age-dependent differences. Methods 3134 patients from 11 public dental clinics, representing urban and rural areas, were invited. Four age cohorts were formed: 3, 7, 11, and 15 years of age and followed between the years 2008 and 2012. Dental examinations (non-invasive) and restorative treatments + extractions (invasive) were registered. During the treatments, self-reports regarding fear and professional proxy reports were registered: Not afraid at all = 0, little nervous = 1, quite afraid = 2, very scared = 3, terrified = 4. Results 2363 patients completed the cohort periods (51% girls and 49% boys). In all, 9708 dental examinations, restorations and extractions were performed. The fear prevalence increased with the invasiveness of the dental procedure; 7–56%. For dental examinations and restorations, fear declined with ascending age. The highest fear prevalence was reported for dental extractions. Younger children reported fear more frequently than older children, p < 0.001. Frequent inconsistencies between self-reports and proxy reports were observed among the younger children (16%) compared to the older children (8%), p < 0.001. Conclusion Non-congruence was observed for self-reports and proxy reports regarding all age cohorts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Young patients’ self-reported fear compared to professionals’ assessments during invasive and non-invasive dental visits: a prospective, longitudinal study

Krekmanova

Sotirianou

Sabel

2022

Eur Arch Paediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Insufficient pain prophylaxis and pain management may lead to unnecessary suffering for the young dental patients 1,2 . As children are susceptible to how they are cared for, pain during oral procedures may initiate behaviour management problems (BMPs) and dental fear (DF) 3–7 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Insufficient pain prophylaxis and pain management may lead to unnecessary suffering for the young dental patients. 1,2 As children are susceptible to how they are cared for, pain during oral procedures may initiate behaviour management problems (BMPs) and dental fear (DF). [3][4][5][6][7] Furthermore, pain may cause a child's non-attendance for regular dental care, thus resulting in oral health deterioration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Students' attitudes and knowledge on pain and pain management in paediatric dentistry—An observational study

Jaldin

Krekmanova

2022

Eur J Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:The dental and dental hygienist educational programs prepare students with knowledge on children's prophylactic pain treatment and pain management. Observing the students' understanding could help educational efforts to be more student oriented. The aim was to evaluate dental and dental hygienist students' knowledge and attitudes on pain prevention and pain management in children and adolescents, applying a multidimensional questionnaire previously used on general dental practitioners.Materials and Methods: Three hundred and four dental and dental hygienist students at Swedish universities were eligible for the survey. Written and oral information was given about the study's aim, methods, anonymity and voluntary participation. The multidimensional questionnaire included 47 closed questions. Results:The total responding rate was 65.4%; dental students 61.1% and dental hygienist students 92.8%. The total mean of knowledge and attitudes, beneficial for the treating of patient pain, varied between 57.1% and 83.3%. The biggest knowledge gap was identified regarding the items: Children under 2 years of age experience less pain than children over 2 years undergoing similar treatment(34.3%), The dentist is better suited than the parent to judge if a child is in pain (29.4%), and usually the child's pain experience diminishes when the parents are present (24.2%). Conclusion:Dental and dental hygienist students reported vastly spread knowledge and attitudes regarding pain prophylactic and pain management in children and adolescents, as measured by a multidimensional questionnaire previously used on GDPs.Knowledge on students' understanding of the young patient's pain could help educational efforts to be more student oriented. The questionnaire must be further modified and more extensively tested to meet each participating students' program level.

show abstract

Sensors: future tools for detecting young patient’s stress during a dental invasive versus a non-invasive dental treatment—a pilot study

Jaldin,

Jonasson,

Fagrell

et al. 2024

Eur Arch Paediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim A reliable tool to visualise children’s early stress signs to prevent dental fear development is needed. The aim was to evaluate the commercially available, CE marked, Shimmer3 GSR + unit’s ability to indicate for stress as a reaction of fear or pain for a non-invasive dental treatment (NI) and an invasive dental treatment (I). Methods Patients 14–16 years old were invited to undergo an oral check-up (NI) or an orthodontic premolar extraction (I), respectively. Digital data, measured via electrodes and optical pulse probe, placed on the wrist and fingers, monitored by the Shimmer3 GSR + unit, was transferred via Bluetooth to the HP-laptop. The observed digital parameters were: heart rate based on photoplethysmography (PPG), galvanic skin response (GSR), and 3-axis gyroscope and accelerometer signals for hand movements. Protocols for patient self-report scales were used: coloured analogue scale for pain intensity, facial analogue scale for the mood, and a dental fear scale. Descriptive statistics was performed. Results The NI-group: 20 patients, (14.6 ± 0.5 years), underwent 20 oral check-ups. The I-group: 14 patients, (15.3 ± 0.5 years), underwent 28 premolar extractions. All patients tolerated the Shimmer3 GSR + unit well. The GSR signal increased significantly, at start and during the oral injection, in the I-group. The GSR amplitudes persisted throughout and post the dental injection. No general uniform pattern or high GSR amplitudes were produced regarding NI-group. Conclusions Considering the limitations of this study, the following conclusions can be made: the invasive treatment resulted in a specific unison GSR pattern, while the non-invasive procedure showed individually scattered GSR reactions. The commercially available CE-marked Shimmer3 GSR + device indicated the patient's stress response triggered by the invasive anaesthetic procedure.

show abstract

Children’s and Adolescents’ Pain, Discomfort, Fear, Cooperation, and Parental Presence During Dental Extractions

Abstract: Less traumatizing methods for invasive dental techniques during injection and extraction are available, although to date, studies report that the usage of pain preventive interventions

Cited by 3 publications

References 16 publications

Young patients’ self-reported fear compared to professionals’ assessments during invasive and non-invasive dental visits: a prospective, longitudinal study

Young patients’ self-reported fear compared to professionals’ assessments during invasive and non-invasive dental visits: a prospective, longitudinal study

Students' attitudes and knowledge on pain and pain management in paediatric dentistry—An observational study

Sensors: future tools for detecting young patient’s stress during a dental invasive versus a non-invasive dental treatment—a pilot study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About