Background: The inferior alveolar nerve block is the most common injection technique used in dentistry and many modifications of the conventional nerve block have been recently described in the literature. Hence; we planned the present study to compare the success rate of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) technique and Gow-Gates (GG) Technique for Mandibular Block in patients undergoing mandibular third molar surgical extraction. Materials & methods: The present study included assessment of efficacy of two different mandibular anaesthesia techniques in patients undergoing dental surgical procedure. A total of 60 subjects were included in the present study, out of which 32 were males and 28 were females. Two sets of tests, an electric pulp test (EPT) for evaluating pulpal anesthesia and a sharp explorer test (SET) for evaluating gingival anesthesia, were performed prior to either injection. All the patients were broadly divided into two study groups. Group 1 included subjects in which GG mandibular anaesthesia technique was used, and Group 2 in which IANB technique was used. The rating scale was recorded as A for good, B for fair, and C for poor effect. All the results were compiled and analysed by SPSS software. Results: While comparing pain on injection, it was seen that 18 and 17 patients in group 1 and group 2 had no pain on injection respectively. It was observed that similar percentage of patients in both the groups had ‘A’ score of satisfaction. Non- significant results were obtained while comparing the success rate in subjects of both the study groups. Conclusion: In terms of success, both the techniques are equally effective.
Key words: Anesthesia, Gow- gates, Technique

Corresponding Author: Dr. Priyanka Rajpal Arora, Senior Lecturer, Department of Oral surgery, College of dental science & hospital, Rau, Indore.
This article may be cited as: Arora PR, Loksh Y, Chhajlani R, Soni P, Patel A, Singh S, Sathe S. Assessment of success rate and onset time of two different mandibular anaesthesia techniques: A comparative study. Int J Res Health Allied Sci 2017;3(5):1-3.