For fearful and uncooperative children behavioral management techniques are used. In order to control the pain and anxiety in pedodontic patients, pharmacologic sedation, anesthesia and analgesia are commonly used. Midazolam is commonly used as an oral sedation agent in children; it has several features such as safety of use, quick onset and certain degree of amnesia that makes it a desirable sedation agent in children. This review paper discusses various aspects of oral midazolam, ketamine and their combinations in conscious sedation including, advantages of oral route of sedation, pharmacokinetics, range of oral doses, and antagonists for clinical dental treatment procedures.

Dental fear and anxiety associated with dental extractions under local anesthesia can be reduced by showing a tooth extraction video to the patients preoperatively.

Pain control during the dental procedure is essentials and challenging. A complete efficacious pulp anesthesia has not been attained yet. The regional anesthesia such as inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) only does not guarantee the effective anesthesia with patients suffering from irreversible pulpitis. This main aim of this review was to discuss various aspects of intraseptal dental anesthesia and its role significance in pain-free treatment in the dental office. In addition, reasons of failure and limitations of this technique have been highlighted. Literature search was conducted for peer-reviewed articles published in English language in last 30 years. Search words such as dental anesthesia, pain control, intraseptal, and nerve block were entered using a web of knowledge and Google scholar databases. Various dental local anesthesia techniques were reviewed. A combination of block anesthesia, buccal infiltration and intraligamentary injection resulted in deep anesthesia (P = 0.003), and higher success rate compared to IANB. For pain-free management of conditions such as irreversible pulpitis, buccal infiltration (4% articaine), and intraosseous injection (2% lidocaine) are better than intraligamentary and IANB injections. Similarly, nerve block is not always effective for pain-free root canal treatment hence, needing supplemental anesthesia. Intraseptal anesthesia is an efficient and effective technique that can be used in maxillary and mandibular adult dentition. This technique is also beneficial when used in conjunction to the regional block or local dental anesthesia.

Objective:This study is aimed to establish the microtensile bond strength of enamel following exposure to an aerated drink at various time intervals with/without application of remineralization agent. In addition, degree of remineralization and demineralization of tooth enamel has been assessed using polarized light microscopy.Materials and Methods:Seventy extracted human incisors split into two halves were immersed in aerated beverage (cola drink) for 5 min and stored in saliva until the time of microtensile bond testing. Prepared specimens were divided randomly into two study groups; remineralizing group (n = 70): specimens were treated for remineralization using casein phosphopeptides and amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) remineralization agent (Recaldent™; GC Europe) and control group (n = 70): no remineralization treatment; specimens were kept in artificial saliva. All specimens were tested for microtensile bond strength at regular intervals (1 h, 1 days, 2 days, 1 week, and 2 weeks) using a universal testing machine. The results statistically analyzed (P = 0.05) using two-way ANOVA test.Results:Results showed statistically significant increase in bond strength in CPP-ACP tested group (P < 0.05) at all-time intervals. The bond strength of remineralizing group samples at 2 days (~13.64 megapascals [MPa]) is comparable to that of control group after 1 week (~12.44 MPa).Conclusions:CPP-ACP treatment of teeth exposed to an aerated drink provided significant increase in bond strength at a shorter interval compared to teeth exposed to saliva alone.

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and severity of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders among undergraduate students. In addition, the severity of TMD was examined in terms of its relationship with gender, age and field of study. Methods A total of 439 undergraduate students of both genders (age range: 20–27 years) who were studying at various colleges at Taibah University were invited to participate in this study. Each student was provided with a questionnaire, and the significance and purpose of the study were explained. The data were collected using Fonseca's questionnaire, an instrument that assessed the demographic characteristics of the students and included ten key questions. The severity of TMD was categorized as no, mild, moderate or severe. The data were analysed using SPSS Version 22 (IBM, Illinois, USA). The chi-square test was used to compare the data from different groups and to determine whether the differences were statistically significant. Results Of those who were invited, 78 students did not return the questionnaires, whereas another 11 were excluded due to their submitting an incomplete questionnaire. A majority of the students reported no TMD (46.7%) or mild TMD (42.7%). A moderate level of TMD was reported by 8.8% of students. Only 1.7% of students reported severe TMD. No significant differences were observed in the severity of TMD in terms of student age or field of study. Conclusion TMD is more prevalent among female students than male students. However, its occurrence is not affected by the age and field of study of the student.

Objective:To investigate the speed of action and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine for upper teeth extractions.Materials and Methods:Forty-five patients were included in the articaine 4% group, and 45 in the mepivacaine 2% control group. After all injections, soft and hard tissue numbness was objectively gauged by dental probe at intervals of 15 s. Furthermore, the discomfort of the injections were recorded by the patients after each treatment on standard 100 mm visual analog scales, tagged at the endpoints with “no pain” (0 mm) and “unbearable pain” (100 mm).Results:There were significant differences in the meantime of first numbness to associated palatal mucosa and tooth of patients between mepivacaine and articaine buccal infiltration (BI) groups P = 0.01 and 0.01. Patients in the articaine group recorded earlier palatal mucosa and teeth numbness than those in the mepivacaine group. With regards to the discomfort of the needle injections, palatal injection was significantly more painful than BI (t-test: P < 0.001). Articaine buccal injection was significantly more painful than mepivacaine buccal injection (t-test: P <0.001). However, articaine palatal injection was less painful than articaine BI. Clinically, anesthesia onset time was faster in anterior upper teeth than upper middle and posterior teeth.Conclusions:BIs with 4% articaine was faster in achieving palate and teeth anesthesia than 2% mepivacaine for extraction of upper maxillary teeth. Patients in mepivacaine BI and articaine palatal injection groups reported less pain with needle injection. Failure of anesthesia was noticeable with maxillary multiple-rooted teeth.

Objectives: To assess the effects of immediate and delayed loadings of dental implants on the overall quality of life (QoL) of patients. Methods: The prospective analysis was conducted in the Department of Periodontology Clinics, Faculty of Dentistry Hospital, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study was conducted from November 2013 to August 2016 and was according to the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. Quality of life in 24 patients (10 males and 14 females), aged between 18-60 years were assessed. Among the patients, 8 were opted for immediate implant loading (Group I), while 16 have opted for delayed implant loading (Group II). The quality of life was analyzed using a QoL assessment scale before and after the implant loading. Results: Overall assessment revealed that the QoL among the patients immediately after loading of dental implant (Group I) was better as compared to the delayed loading of dental implant (Group II). The differences of functional and financial aspects were significant between both groups. The majority of the immediate implant’s loadings have been performed in the anterior aesthetic zone and has a significant impact on the QoL. Conclusion: The results concluded that immediate loading of dental implant is better than the delayed loading of a dental implant with a prosthesis.

Context:Anxiety and distress regarding dental treatment is a major issue for dental patients and can be exaggerated in pediatric dental patients.Aims:The aim was to investigate how different methods of induction for general anesthesia affect children's distress for dental procedures such as extraction of teeth.Subjects and Methods:This was an observational clinical study conducted at Manchester University Dental Hospital. The induction of anesthesia in children was achieved with either intravenous (I.V.) or a gaseous induction. The Modified Child Smiley Faces Scales were completed for children at various times intervals.Statistical Analysis Used:There were statistically significant differences between the mean distress scores for the I.V. and inhalation groups (P values from independent t-test: P < 0.001) was applied.Results:In gaseous induction group, the number of children who scored severe and very severe distress was greater than those who were in I.V. group. Gaseous induction was used for 23 children. Preoperatively, 56.5% children were in very severe distress, 17.4% in severe distress, 13% in moderate distress, 8.7% in mild distress and only one (4.3%) showed no distress. For I.V. induction, 11.2% children were in very severe distress, 9% in severe distress, and 9.6% in moderate distress, 24.2% in mild distress and 46.1% showed no distress.Conclusions:Gaseous induction anesthesia for extractions of teeth does produce high levels of distress than I.V. induction in children for dental extractions. There was no significant difference between both induction methods in terms of distress levels at the time of recovery and 15 min postoperatively.