- Joined
- Mar 5, 2006
- Messages
- 24
- Reaction score
- 0
to the OMFS residents and senior dental students:
an interesting clinical situation has come about in our school relating to the use of articaine. with a recent shift in administrative powers, the anesthetic has been banned from use (along with all other 4% juices) in the main clinic; OMFS continues to use it behind their closed doors, despite being viewed by the rest of the school as some sort of black-market contraband (they do however stand behind it's "contraindication" for IA). [On a side note, the powers-that-be have put a cap on the amount of anesthetic dispensed (2 cartridges); anything more requires instructor permission, and another signature]. In a healthcare world that's becoming more and more "evidence based," it seems like a hypocritical slap in the face to the students not to justify such radical shifts in protocal with... well, what else... EVIDENCE. I've reviewed many of the relevant studies and I'm familiar with both sides of the Articaine argument. There's no denying that the literature is muddled, and there's some critical flaws to each side. I was wondering what everyone's experience has been like at residency with respect to local anesthetics. I know there's some variation; for instance, I spent time at one OMFS program that didn't allow the use of Marcaine because of the "threat of NEUROTOXICITY". It just seems like there's so much dogma out there and the research is filled with so many confounding variables and reporting biases. Anybody got any solid ground to stand on, or should we just continue to practice the way the lawyers dictate...
an interesting clinical situation has come about in our school relating to the use of articaine. with a recent shift in administrative powers, the anesthetic has been banned from use (along with all other 4% juices) in the main clinic; OMFS continues to use it behind their closed doors, despite being viewed by the rest of the school as some sort of black-market contraband (they do however stand behind it's "contraindication" for IA). [On a side note, the powers-that-be have put a cap on the amount of anesthetic dispensed (2 cartridges); anything more requires instructor permission, and another signature]. In a healthcare world that's becoming more and more "evidence based," it seems like a hypocritical slap in the face to the students not to justify such radical shifts in protocal with... well, what else... EVIDENCE. I've reviewed many of the relevant studies and I'm familiar with both sides of the Articaine argument. There's no denying that the literature is muddled, and there's some critical flaws to each side. I was wondering what everyone's experience has been like at residency with respect to local anesthetics. I know there's some variation; for instance, I spent time at one OMFS program that didn't allow the use of Marcaine because of the "threat of NEUROTOXICITY". It just seems like there's so much dogma out there and the research is filled with so many confounding variables and reporting biases. Anybody got any solid ground to stand on, or should we just continue to practice the way the lawyers dictate...