![]() However, device combined with sedation showed no difference for either outcome (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48 one trial, 27 participants very low‐certainty evidence and RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.69 one trial, 27 participants very low‐certainty evidence respectively).Īcupressure using a sea band with or without sedation showed no clear difference in completing dental procedure (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.17 one trial, 21 participants very low‐certainty evidence and RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 5.16 one trial, 19 participants very low‐certainty evidence respectively), or reduction in gagging (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.17 one trial, 21 participants very low‐certainty evidence and RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.72 to 10.14 one trial, 19 participants very low‐certainty evidence respectively) when compared to sham acupressure with or without sedation. ![]() ![]() Acupuncture at P6 with sedation did not show any difference when compared to sham acupuncture with sedation (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.28 one trial, 34 participants very low‐certainty evidence).Īcupressure using thumb pressure with or without sedation showed no clear difference in completing dental procedure (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.10 one trial, 39 participants very low‐certainty evidence and RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.46 one trial, 30 participants very low‐certainty evidence respectively), or reduction in gagging (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.23 one trial, 39 participants very low‐certainty evidence and RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.41 one trial, 30 participants very low‐certainty evidence respectively) when compared to sham acupressure with or without sedation.Īcupressure at P6 with device showed uncertain evidence regarding the successful completion of dental procedure (RR 2.63, 95% CI 1.33 to 5.18 one trial, 34 participants very low‐certainty evidence) and uncertain evidence regarding the reduction in gagging (RR 3.94, 95% CI 1.63 to 9.53 one trial, 34 participants very low‐certainty evidence) when compared to sham acupressure. One trial reported reduction in gagging and another reported presence or absence of gagging during dental procedure.Īcupuncture at P6 showed uncertain evidence regarding the successful completion of dental procedure (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.01 two trials, 59 participants very low‐certainty evidence) and uncertain evidence regarding the reduction in gagging (RR 2.57, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.89 one trial, 26 participants very low‐certainty evidence) in comparison to sham acupuncture. One cross‐over and one split‐mouth trial studied the effect of laser at P6 point compared to control. These trials reported both completion of dental procedure and reduction in gagging (assessor and patient reported) as their outcomes. One trial compared acupuncture at P6 point to sham acupuncture. We included four trials at unclear risk of bias with 328 participants (263 adults and 65 children who were four years or older), in which one trial compared acupuncture and acupressure (with thumb, device and sea band) at P6 (point located three‐finger breadths below the wrist on the inner forearm in between the two tendons) to sham acupuncture and acupressure with and without sedation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |