PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-25 (40)
 

Clipboard (0)
None
Journals
Authors
more »
Year of Publication
more »
jtitle_s:("anesti Prog")
1.  Alarm Fatigue Can Decrease the Safety of Dental Office Sedation and Anesthesia 
Anesthesia Progress  2013;60(3):93-94.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-60.3.93
PMCID: PMC3771202  PMID: 24010985
2.  New FDA Black Box Warning for Codeine: How Will This Affect Dentists? 
Anesthesia Progress  2013;60(2):35-36.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-60.2.35
PMCID: PMC3683877  PMID: 23763556
3.  Norman Trieger, DMD, MD 1929–2012 
Anesthesia Progress  2013;60(1):1-2.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-60.1.1
PMCID: PMC3601723
4.  Have You Met Your Production Quota Today? 
Anesthesia Progress  2012;59(4):141-142.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-59.4.141
PMCID: PMC3522490  PMID: 23241035
5.  Prevention of Fire in the Dental Chair 
Anesthesia Progress  2012;59(3):105-106.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-59.3.105
PMCID: PMC3468287  PMID: 23050749
6.  What Else Can We Learn from the Anesthesia Specialty Application? 
Anesthesia Progress  2012;59(1):1-2.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-59.1.1
PMCID: PMC3309295  PMID: 22428967
7.  Improving the Quality and Fairness of Sedation and Anesthesia Evaluations 
Anesthesia Progress  2011;58(4):155-156.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-58.4.155
PMCID: PMC3237324  PMID: 22168804
8.  The Cost of Learning From Our Mistakes 
Anesthesia Progress  2011;58(2):55-56.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-58.2.55
PMCID: PMC3198126  PMID: 21679039
9.  The Fallacy of a Lifesaving Sublingual Injection of Flumazenil 
Anesthesia Progress  2011;58(1):1-2.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-58.1.1
PMCID: PMC3265264  PMID: 21410357
10.  The ADA's New Emergency Airway Course For Sedationists 
Anesthesia Progress  2010;57(4):137-138.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-57.4.137
PMCID: PMC3006660  PMID: 21174566
11.  Why Is Physical Restraint Still Acceptable for Dentistry? 
Anesthesia Progress  2010;57(2):43-44.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-57.2.43
PMCID: PMC2886916  PMID: 20553133
12.  What Can We Learn From the H1N1 Flu Epidemic? 
Anesthesia Progress  2010;57(1):1-2.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006-57.1.1
PMCID: PMC2844232  PMID: 20331332
13.  The Increasing Use of Alcohol-Based Hand Sanitizers 
Anesthesia progress  2005;52(3):85.
doi:10.2344/0003-3006(2005)52[85:TIUOAH]2.0.CO;2
PMCID: PMC1586789  PMID: 16252736
14.  Comparison of injection pain, heart rate increase, and postinjection pain of articaine and lidocaine in a primary intraligamentary injection administered with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system. 
Anesthesia Progress  2004;51(4):126-133.
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to compare the pain of injection, heart rate increase, and postinjection pain of the intraligamentary injection of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine administered with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system. Using a crossover design, intraligamentary injections of 1.4 mL of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and 1.4 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine were randomly administered on the mesial and distal aspects of the mandibular first molar with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system in a double-blind manner at 2 separate appointments to 51 subjects. The results demonstrated the incidence of moderate pain was 14%-27% with needle insertion, with 0%-4% reporting severe pain. For solution deposition, moderate pain was reported 8%-18% of the time, with no reports of severe pain. There were no significant differences between the articaine and lidocaine solutions. Regarding heart rate changes, neither anesthetic solution resulted in a significant increase in heart rate over baseline readings. On day 1 postinjection, there was a 31% incidence of moderate/severe pain with the articaine solution and 20% incidence of moderate/severe pain with the lidocaine solution. The moderate/severe pain ratings decreased over the next 2 days. There were no significant differences between the articaine and lidocaine solutions. We concluded that the intraligamentary injection of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine was similar to 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine for injection pain and postinjection pain in the mandibular first molar when administered with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system. For both anesthetic solutions, heart rate did not significantly increase with the intraligamentary injection using the computer-controlled local anesthetic system.
PMCID: PMC2007494  PMID: 15675261
18.  Faulty office systems invite human error. 
Anesthesia Progress  2004;51(1):1.
PMCID: PMC2007464  PMID: 15106682
19.  Dental anesthesia management of methemoglobinemia-susceptible patients: a case report and review of literature. 
Anesthesia Progress  2004;51(1):24-27.
A healthy but slightly pale 24-year-old female patient with a history of "turning blue" following dental procedures performed under local anesthesia claimed allergies to sulfa drugs, aspirin, Benadryl, and "all caines." The patient also acknowledged mild cyanosis after extreme exertion, Native American ancestry, and a 1996 diagnosis of methemoglobinemia following administration of a sulfa drug. Previous medical and dental records were reviewed. Restoration of several teeth and extraction of 2 third-molar teeth were completed under general anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced with propofol, nasotracheal intubation was accomplished with succinylcholine, and anesthesia was maintained with desflurane in oxygen supplemented by meperidine without local anesthesia. Vital signs, including pulse oximetry, remained stable, and the patient was dismissed after a 2-hour recovery/observation period. The patient experienced no postoperative complications. This case report provides a review of literature and clinical guidelines for management of methemoglobinemia-susceptible patients.
PMCID: PMC2007462  PMID: 15106687
25.  Dental anesthesiology--a most noble profession. 
Anesthesia Progress  2002;49(1):1-2.
PMCID: PMC2007400  PMID: 12779106

Results 1-25 (40)