Comparison of Pain and Mouth Opening in Primary versus Secondary Closure after Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar

Authors

  • Muhammad Aamir, Tahir Ullah Khan, Muhammad Masood Khan, Muhammad Ishfaq, Mohammad Farooq, Hanif Ullah

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs20221611147

Abstract

Aim: To compare pain score and trismus in primary and secondary closure of surgical wound after removal of impacted mandibular third molar.

Study design: Randomized controlled trial.

Place and duration of study: Bacha Khan Medical Complex, Gajju Khan Medical College, Shah Mansoor Swabi Pakistan from 1stMay 2020 to 30thJune 2021.

Methodology: Fifty patients were divided into two groups i-e group A (Primary closure) and group B (secondary closure). Demographic data (name, age, gender and contact number) was recorded. Pre-operative mouth opening was measured as maximum interincisal distance in millimetres. Pre-operative variables were again re-evaluated on 3rd post-operative day for pain on Visual analogue scale (VAS 0-10) and for mouth opening.

Results: Thirty one (62%) patients were males and 19(38%) were females. Overall mean pain score was 2.48±1.90 on visual analogue scale (VAS).  Mean age was 30.24±7.64 years while mean post-operative interincisal distance was 43.5±4.717 mm. The difference between Group A and B for both mouth opening ((P=0.03; 95% CI = 0.135, 0.434) and pain (P=0.006; 95% CI = 0.426, 2.453) were statistically significant.

Conclusion: When intra operative parameters of impaction difficulty are the same, secondary closure ensures minimal morbidity of pain and trismus as compared to primary wound closure.

Keywords: Flap closure; Primary closure; Secondary closure; Impacted third molar

Downloads

How to Cite

Muhammad Aamir, Tahir Ullah Khan, Muhammad Masood Khan, Muhammad Ishfaq, Mohammad Farooq, Hanif Ullah. (2022). Comparison of Pain and Mouth Opening in Primary versus Secondary Closure after Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar. Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences, 16(11), 147. https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs20221611147