{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026845637583892617, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010067114093959731, 'mean_word_length': 5.248502994011976, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of effect of 3D video glasses on perceived pain and unpleasantness induced by restorative dental treatment

Previous studies on modulation of anxiety, pain and unpleasantness have documented a positive effect of video glasses (I‐Glasses™, Virtual i‐O™, Seattle, USA) on the perceived pain and unpleasantness under different laboratory and clinical conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether distraction induced by video glasses also had an effect on the perceived intensity of pain and unpleasantness during dental treatment. Pain and unpleasantness was evoked by the preparation (drilling) of a minor dental cavity (class I). Twenty‐three patients (17 female and six male, age range 20–49 years) with a need for an occlusal dental restoration in two homologous teeth participated in the study. In this split‐mouth design, the patient received the dental treatment wearing 3D video glasses and without video glasses (control situation) in a randomized order. The tooth cavities were prepared in accordance with conventional techniques after mounting the video glasses. The patient rated the intensity of pain and unpleasantness on 100 mm visual analogue scales (VASs) after preparation of the first cavity; immediately after, the opposite tooth was prepared and again the volunteer rated the intensity of pain and unpleasantness. The cavities were then filled using a routine composite technique. Eventually, the patient indicated whether she would prefer video glasses or not if she were to have another filling and what the expectations of the effect had been. Differences in VAS ratings in the video and control situation were tested by Student's t ‐test. There was no statistically significant effect on the perceived pain (p=0.90) or unpleasantness (p=0.39), but the majority (74%) of the patients would still prefer to wear video glasses if they were to have another dental filling, and 73% had expected a positive effect of the video glasses. These findings suggest that perceived intensity of dental pain is resistant to a simple distraction technique.