These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Teaching alternatives to the standard inferior alveolar nerve block in dental education: outcomes in clinical practice.
    Author: Johnson TM, Badovinac R, Shaefer J.
    Journal: J Dent Educ; 2007 Sep; 71(9):1145-52. PubMed ID: 17761620.
    Abstract:
    Surveys were sent to Harvard School of Dental Medicine students and graduates from the classes of 2000 through 2006 to determine their current primary means of achieving mandibular anesthesia. Orthodontists and orthodontic residents were excluded. All subjects received clinical training in the conventional inferior alveolar nerve block and two alternative techniques (the Akinosi mandibular block and the Gow-Gates mandibular block) during their predoctoral dental education. This study tests the hypothesis that students and graduates who received training in the conventional inferior alveolar nerve block, the Akinosi mandibular block, and the Gow-Gates mandibular block will report more frequent current utilization of alternatives to the conventional inferior alveolar nerve block than clinicians trained in the conventional technique only. At the 95 percent confidence level, we estimated that between 3.7 percent and 16.1 percent (mean=8.5 percent) of clinicians trained in using the Gow-Gates technique use this injection technique primarily, and between 35.4 percent and 56.3 percent (mean=47.5 percent) of those trained in the Gow-Gates method never use this technique. At the same confidence level, between 0.0 percent and 3.8 percent (mean=0.0 percent) of clinicians trained in using the Akinosi technique use this injection clinical technique primarily, and between 62.2 percent and 81.1 percent (mean=72.3 percent) of those trained in the Akinosi method never use this technique. No control group that was completely untrained in the Gow-Gates or Akinosi techniques was available for comparison. However, we presume that zero percent of clinicians who have not been trained in a given technique will use the technique in clinical practice. The confidence interval for the Gow-Gates method excludes this value, while the confidence interval for the Akinosi technique includes zero percent. We conclude that, in the study population, formal clinical training in the Gow-Gates and Akinosi injection techniques lead to a small but significant increase in current primary utilization of the Gow-Gates technique. No significant increase in current primary utilization of the Akinosi technique was found.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]