Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical Research
This prospective clinical study evaluated the experiences and preferences of both patients and clinicians when performing class I–V cavity preparation procedures using a 9300 nm CO<sub>2</sub> laser without anesthetic. A total of 233 procedures were performed on 103 patients. Following t...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-05-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/10/4800 |
| _version_ | 1797501891165290496 |
|---|---|
| author | Gregory Schuster Marc Cohn Gina Agostini-Walesch Alexander Carroll John C. Mitchell |
| author_facet | Gregory Schuster Marc Cohn Gina Agostini-Walesch Alexander Carroll John C. Mitchell |
| author_sort | Gregory Schuster |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This prospective clinical study evaluated the experiences and preferences of both patients and clinicians when performing class I–V cavity preparation procedures using a 9300 nm CO<sub>2</sub> laser without anesthetic. A total of 233 procedures were performed on 103 patients. Following treatment, patients were asked to describe discomfort/pain levels and preferences for future treatment with either laser treatment or traditional therapy. Additionally, clinicians were asked to rate their experiences with the procedures in three technical domains: speed, ease-of-use, and precision. In total, 98% of patients preferred laser treatment to traditional therapy and 93% of all procedures performed were completed with no anesthesia. Younger patients and patients receiving multiple restorations reported significantly higher discomfort, though discomfort scores were very low overall (below 3 on a 10-point pain scale). While there were significant differences in clinician experiences, each clinician reported having generally high satisfaction using the laser with respect to speed, ease of use, and precision. In conclusion, the 9300 nm CO<sub>2</sub> laser provides clinicians a viable option for cavity preparations in dentistry as evidenced by high rates of anesthesia-free procedures with low reported discomfort, the fact that nearly all patients would opt for laser use on future cavity preparations, and generally positive experiences reported by clinicians. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T03:25:08Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-29c3c1a5273d4aeca273d36cf4ab630d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2076-3417 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T03:25:08Z |
| publishDate | 2022-05-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Applied Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-29c3c1a5273d4aeca273d36cf4ab630d2023-11-23T09:53:23ZengMDPI AGApplied Sciences2076-34172022-05-011210480010.3390/app12104800Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical ResearchGregory Schuster0Marc Cohn1Gina Agostini-Walesch2Alexander Carroll3John C. Mitchell4College of Dental Medicine-Arizona, Midwestern University, 5855 W Utopia Ave, Glendale, AZ 85308, USACollege of Dental Medicine-Arizona, Midwestern University, 5855 W Utopia Ave, Glendale, AZ 85308, USACollege of Dental Medicine-Arizona, Midwestern University, 5855 W Utopia Ave, Glendale, AZ 85308, USACollege of Dental Medicine-Arizona, Midwestern University, 5855 W Utopia Ave, Glendale, AZ 85308, USACollege of Dental Medicine-Arizona, Midwestern University, 5855 W Utopia Ave, Glendale, AZ 85308, USAThis prospective clinical study evaluated the experiences and preferences of both patients and clinicians when performing class I–V cavity preparation procedures using a 9300 nm CO<sub>2</sub> laser without anesthetic. A total of 233 procedures were performed on 103 patients. Following treatment, patients were asked to describe discomfort/pain levels and preferences for future treatment with either laser treatment or traditional therapy. Additionally, clinicians were asked to rate their experiences with the procedures in three technical domains: speed, ease-of-use, and precision. In total, 98% of patients preferred laser treatment to traditional therapy and 93% of all procedures performed were completed with no anesthesia. Younger patients and patients receiving multiple restorations reported significantly higher discomfort, though discomfort scores were very low overall (below 3 on a 10-point pain scale). While there were significant differences in clinician experiences, each clinician reported having generally high satisfaction using the laser with respect to speed, ease of use, and precision. In conclusion, the 9300 nm CO<sub>2</sub> laser provides clinicians a viable option for cavity preparations in dentistry as evidenced by high rates of anesthesia-free procedures with low reported discomfort, the fact that nearly all patients would opt for laser use on future cavity preparations, and generally positive experiences reported by clinicians.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/10/4800CO<sub>2</sub> lasercavity preparationsoperative dentistryanalgesia |
| spellingShingle | Gregory Schuster Marc Cohn Gina Agostini-Walesch Alexander Carroll John C. Mitchell Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical Research Applied Sciences CO<sub>2</sub> laser cavity preparations operative dentistry analgesia |
| title | Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical Research |
| title_full | Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical Research |
| title_fullStr | Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical Research |
| title_full_unstemmed | Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical Research |
| title_short | Patient and Clinician Experiences When Using a CO<sub>2</sub> Laser for Cavity Preparations: Lessons learned from Prospective Clinical Research |
| title_sort | patient and clinician experiences when using a co sub 2 sub laser for cavity preparations lessons learned from prospective clinical research |
| topic | CO<sub>2</sub> laser cavity preparations operative dentistry analgesia |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/10/4800 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gregoryschuster patientandclinicianexperienceswhenusingacosub2sublaserforcavitypreparationslessonslearnedfromprospectiveclinicalresearch AT marccohn patientandclinicianexperienceswhenusingacosub2sublaserforcavitypreparationslessonslearnedfromprospectiveclinicalresearch AT ginaagostiniwalesch patientandclinicianexperienceswhenusingacosub2sublaserforcavitypreparationslessonslearnedfromprospectiveclinicalresearch AT alexandercarroll patientandclinicianexperienceswhenusingacosub2sublaserforcavitypreparationslessonslearnedfromprospectiveclinicalresearch AT johncmitchell patientandclinicianexperienceswhenusingacosub2sublaserforcavitypreparationslessonslearnedfromprospectiveclinicalresearch |