Comparative effects of three mucoadhesive gels containing lidocaine, zinc acetate, and tannic acid on the gag reflex of dental patients: a randomized double-blind clinical trial.

Nafiseh Nikkerdar, Hosna Seyedi, Shahla Mirzaeei, Roya Safari-Faramani, Amin Golshah
Author Information
  1. Nafiseh Nikkerdar: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
  2. Hosna Seyedi: School of Dentistry, Shariati Street, Kermanshah, 67139546581, Iran.
  3. Shahla Mirzaeei: Pharmaceutical Sciences Research Center, Health Institute, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Shariati Street, 67139546581, Kermanshah, Kermanshah, Iran.
  4. Roya Safari-Faramani: Social Development and Health Promotion Research Center, School of Health, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
  5. Amin Golshah: School of Dentistry, Shariati Street, Kermanshah, 67139546581, Iran. amin.golshah@gmail.com.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the effects of three mucoadhesive gels containing lidocaine, zinc acetate, and tannic acid on the gag reflex of dental patients.
METHODS: This randomized double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 228 dental patients with gag reflex. The patients were randomly assigned to four groups (n = 57) of placebo, 2% lidocaine, 2% tannic acid, and 2% zinc acetate. The severity of the gag reflex of patients was initially scored by stimulating their soft and hard palate with a radiographic film using a 0-5 visual analog scale. After 5 min, mucoadhesive gels containing 2% lidocaine, zinc acetate, or tannic acid were applied on the hard and soft palate for 5-10 min, and the severity of the gag reflex was scored again. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and paired t-test for the single group comparison (alpha = 0.05).
RESULTS: The four groups had no significant difference in the baseline mean gag score (p = 0.05). The difference in the mean gag score was significant among the four groups after the intervention (p < 0.00), and the mean score in the experimental groups was significantly lower than that in the placebo group (p < 0.00). The difference in the mean gag score was not significant between the experimental groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The mucoadhesive gels containing 2% lidocaine, tannic acid, or zinc acetate significantly decreased the gag reflex in dental patients, with all three treatments showing comparable efficacy compared to the placebo. These findings suggest that each gel formulation is a viable alternative for managing the gag reflex during dental procedures.

Keywords

References

  1. Forsch Komplementmed. 2014;21(2):94-8 [PMID: 24851845]
  2. J Clin Anesth. 2009 Sep;21(6):463 [PMID: 19833285]
  3. J Prosthet Dent. 2001 Mar;85(3):305 [PMID: 11264940]
  4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 13;2019(11): [PMID: 31721146]
  5. Br Dent J. 2010 May 22;208(10):E19 [PMID: 20489741]
  6. Br Dent J. 2006 Dec 9;201(11):721-5; discussion 715 [PMID: 17159959]
  7. Mutat Res. 2010 Dec 21;703(2):99-107 [PMID: 20708098]
  8. Drugs Exp Clin Res. 2002;28(2-3):49-62 [PMID: 12224378]
  9. Food Chem Toxicol. 2009 Jan;47(1):50-4 [PMID: 18950673]
  10. J Endod. 2014 Sep;40(9):1498-500 [PMID: 25146042]
  11. J Dermatolog Treat. 2020 Nov;31(7):730-733 [PMID: 30998422]
  12. In Vivo. 1999 Mar-Apr;13(2):155-71 [PMID: 10363173]
  13. Lasers Med Sci. 2016 Feb;31(2):355-61 [PMID: 26754182]
  14. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2004 Sep-Oct;44(5):594-603 [PMID: 15496046]
  15. Dent Update. 2005 Nov;32(9):544-6, 548-50 [PMID: 16317888]
  16. J Dent. 2009 Jun;37(6):413-23 [PMID: 19303186]
  17. Food Chem Toxicol. 2011 Jun;49(6):1224-8 [PMID: 21376769]
  18. Anaesthesia. 2009 Jul;64(7):783-4; author reply 784 [PMID: 19624637]
  19. J Prosthet Dent. 1995 Mar;73(3):319 [PMID: 7760285]
  20. Int J Prosthodont. 2001 Jul-Aug;14(4):364-6 [PMID: 11508093]
  21. J Prosthet Dent. 2004 May;91(5):459-67 [PMID: 15153854]
  22. J Acupunct Meridian Stud. 2017 Oct;10(5):317-323 [PMID: 29078966]
  23. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2005 Jan;53(1):74-86 [PMID: 15788245]
  24. Nitric Oxide. 2007 Aug;17(1):50-4 [PMID: 17553710]
  25. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2014 Jul;18(4):428-32 [PMID: 25210254]
  26. Br Dent J. 2001 Jun 9;190(11):611-3 [PMID: 11441900]
  27. Am J Emerg Med. 2011 May;29(4):386-90 [PMID: 20825806]
  28. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2007 Aug;212(4):373-8 [PMID: 17660702]
  29. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1997 May;18(5):430-3, 436, 438 passim [PMID: 9533356]
  30. J Dent (Shiraz). 2023 Dec 01;24(4):372-381 [PMID: 38149230]
  31. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2016 Jul-Sep;34(3):238-43 [PMID: 27461807]

MeSH Term

Humans
Double-Blind Method
Lidocaine
Tannins
Male
Gels
Female
Adult
Gagging
Zinc Acetate
Anesthetics, Local
Middle Aged
Young Adult
Polyphenols

Chemicals

Lidocaine
Tannins
Gels
Zinc Acetate
Anesthetics, Local
tannic acid
Polyphenols

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0gagreflexacetateacidlidocainezinctannicdentalpatientsgroups2%mucoadhesivegelscontainingmeanscorethreefourplacebo05significantdifferenceeffectsrandomizeddouble-blindclinicaltrialseverityscoredsofthardpalategroupp < 000experimentalsignificantlyBACKGROUND:studyaimedcompareMETHODS:conducted228randomlyassignedn = 57initiallystimulatingradiographicfilmusing0-5visualanalogscale5 minapplied5-10 minDataanalyzedANOVApairedt-testsinglecomparisonalpha = 0RESULTS:baselinep = 0amonginterventionlowerp > 0CONCLUSIONS:decreasedtreatmentsshowingcomparableefficacycomparedfindingssuggestgelformulationviablealternativemanagingproceduresComparativepatients:GaggingLidocaineTannicZinc

Similar Articles

Cited By