Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Vibrating Concrete

Vibrating Concrete

Mechanical vibrators are instrumental in compacting newly poured concrete within formwork and around reinforcements. This process is essential to eliminate trapped air pockets and establish a dense concrete mass. One widely used method is vibrating by internal vibrators, often referred to as a poker vibrator or immersion vibrator. It is rapidly inserted through the full depth of the freshly laid concrete and slightly extends into the layer below it (which remains in a plastic state). Consistent...

Muscle Stimulation Frequency

Muscle Stimulation Frequency

The contraction strength of muscles is regulated by motor neurons, which modulate the frequency of action potentials dispatched to the motor units based on the body's requirements. This process of varying the muscle stimulation frequency allows muscles to contract with a force that is precisely tailored to the needs of the moment, whether lifting a feather or a heavy box.
Wave summation
At low firing rates, motor neurons induce individual twitch contractions in muscle fibers. These twitches...

Motor Unit Stimulation

Motor Unit Stimulation

When the neuron of a motor unit fires an action potential, it triggers a series of events, leading to a twitch contraction in the muscle fibers. The process of excitation-contraction coupling is crucial in relaying the action potential to the muscle fibers.
The latent period of contraction marks the onset of excitation-contraction coupling, when the action potential propagates across the sarcolemma, preparing the muscle fibers for contraction. As the fibers enter the contraction phase, the...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Efficacy of Herbal vs. Chlorhexidine Mouthwash in Experimental Gingivitis: A Cross-over Clinical and Microbiological Study.

Dentistry journal·2025

Same author

Development of a Novel Web-Based Intervention Targeting Pain-Related Outcomes in Individuals With Chronic Orofacial Pain: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

JMIR research protocols·2025

Same author

Cone beam computed tomography for endodontics: incidental findings and respective significance.

Dento maxillo facial radiology·2025

Same author

Changes in Implant Surface Characteristics and Wettability Induced by Smoking In Vitro: A Preliminary Investigation.

Materials (Basel, Switzerland)·2025

Same author

Qualitative Analysis of Bone-Implant Interface After Implant Placement with Condensation Technique in Vitro.

The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants·2025

Same author

Racial and socioeconomic status diversity and GVHD outcomes.

Blood advances·2024

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 1, 2026

The Quantification of Injectability by Mechanical Testing

The Quantification of Injectability by Mechanical Testing

Published on: May 13, 2020

A Vibration Device to Control Injection Discomfort.

Jeffry R Shaefer¹, Stephanie J Lee², Nina K Anderson³

¹Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry (Jamesburg, N.J. : 1995)

|June 7, 2017

Summary

The DentalVibe® Injection Comfort System (DV3) significantly reduced pain and discomfort during local anesthesia injections. This vibration device offers a promising method for improving patient comfort during dental procedures.

More Related Videos

A Simple Non-invasive Method for Temporary Knockdown of Upper Limb Proprioception

A Simple Non-invasive Method for Temporary Knockdown of Upper Limb Proprioception

Published on: March 3, 2018

Cheek Injection Model for Simultaneous Measurement of Pain and Itch-related Behaviors

Cheek Injection Model for Simultaneous Measurement of Pain and Itch-related Behaviors

Published on: September 27, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 1, 2026

The Quantification of Injectability by Mechanical Testing

The Quantification of Injectability by Mechanical Testing

Published on: May 13, 2020

A Simple Non-invasive Method for Temporary Knockdown of Upper Limb Proprioception

A Simple Non-invasive Method for Temporary Knockdown of Upper Limb Proprioception

Published on: March 3, 2018

Cheek Injection Model for Simultaneous Measurement of Pain and Itch-related Behaviors

Cheek Injection Model for Simultaneous Measurement of Pain and Itch-related Behaviors

Published on: September 27, 2019

Area of Science:

Dentistry
Pain Management
Biomedical Engineering

Background:

Local anesthesia injections are a common source of pain and anxiety in dental procedures.
Distraction and counter-stimulation techniques can mitigate injection discomfort.
The DentalVibe® Injection Comfort System (DV3) utilizes pulsed vibration as a counter-stimulation method.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate the efficacy of the third-generation DentalVibe® (DV3) in reducing pain and discomfort during intraoral long buccal (LB) and inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) injections.
To assess the impact of DV3 on the time required for complete anesthesia during IAN blocks.

Main Methods:

A pilot study involving 60 subjects (30 male, 30 female, aged 21-32) who received bilateral LB injections and an IAN block.
Subjects rated pain using a visual analog scale and discomfort, unpleasantness, and difficulty using a modified symptom severity index.
DV3 was randomly assigned to either the first or second LB injection and to 30 subjects for the IAN block, with no topical anesthesia applied.

Main Results:

Subjects reported significantly less pain, discomfort, unpleasantness, and difficulty with both LB and IAN injections when using DV3 (P < .05).
The efficacy of DV3 was consistent regardless of its application to the first or second LB injection.
No significant difference in the time to achieve complete anesthesia was observed for IAN blocks with DV3 use (P > .05).

Conclusions:

The DV3 system significantly reduced pain and discomfort associated with local anesthetic injections in this pilot study.
The findings suggest DV3 is an effective tool for enhancing patient comfort during dental anesthesia.
Further research is recommended to investigate DV3's effectiveness in layperson populations.