Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Clin Cases. Apr 6, 2026; 14(10): 118053
Published online Apr 6, 2026. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v14.i10.118053
Published online Apr 6, 2026. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v14.i10.118053
Table 4 Pain experienced during access cavity preparation with 4% articaine and 2% lignocaine according to the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale, n (%)
| Item | No hurt (0) | Little bit (2) | Little more (4) | Even more (6) | Whole lot (8) | Hurt worst (10) | Median (interquartile range) | P value |
| Articaine | 10 (50.0) | 9 (45.0) | 1 (5.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0, 2) | 0.043a |
| Lignocaine | 5 (25.0) | 9 (45.0) | 2 (10.0) | 3 (15.0) | 1 (5.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (0, 4) |
- Citation: D’Souza OK. Comparative evaluation of anesthetic efficacy of articaine vs lignocaine during root canal therapy in hypomineralized second primary molars. World J Clin Cases 2026; 14(10): 118053
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v14/i10/118053.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v14.i10.118053