Introduction: This study aimed to explore the effect of alveolar bone grafting on the clinical outcomes, health quality, and satisfaction in patients with cleft lip and palate. Materials and Methods: Questionnaire review study was done to patients who underwent secondary alveolar bone grafting retrospectively. This study included 28 patients who underwent secondary alveolar bone grafting by harvesting graft from the anterior iliac crest, excluding one, in Oral and Maxillofacial Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Turkey, during the period from January 2012 to March 2016. All patients were operated using the same technique and by the same surgical team. Patients were interviewed to fill Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) and Postsurgical Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSPSQ) 6 months postoperatively. The questionnaires were used to assess the relationship between health quality and patient satisfaction. Also, grafted sites were evaluated with respect to fistula, presence of cleft palate. Results: The sample consisted of 28 patients (19 females and 9 males), including 13 with bilateral clefts and 15 with unilateral clefts. The mean Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) of SF-12 scores were 54.5718 and 44.6436, respectively. The mean PSPSQ score was 36.7368. PCS scores were found to be significantly correlated with the PSPSQ scores (P ≤0.05). No correlation was found between MCS and PSPSQ scores (P >0.05). A precise and good planned surgery resulted in good satisfaction among patients with cleft lip and palate who underwent alveolar bone grafting. The patient satisfaction was correlated with the success of the operation.

Objectives: The absolute necessity of a palatal injection for the extraction of primary maxillary molars has never been explored, despite the fact that it is widely known that children do not tolerate local anesthetic injections into the palatal tissue well. The aim of this study was to compare separately the perception of pain in the absence of palatal injection after anesthesia and maxillary primary molar tooth extraction using different anesthetic solutions and different post-anesthetic waiting times. Materials and methods: A single-blinded randomized controlled study was conducted in 78 participants (26 patients with palatal anesthesia (the control groups), and 26 patients with 5 min and 26 patients with 8 min post-anesthetic waiting time without palatal anesthesia (the study groups)). Subjective experiences of pain were evaluated separately after anesthesia and tooth extraction using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBS). Results: In terms of VAS scores obtained following administration of anesthesia, there was a statistically significant difference between the groups (p0.05). Conclusions: While the pain reported following administration of anesthesia was found to be higher in the groups receiving palatal anesthesia, no difference was found between the groups in the pain reported after tooth extraction. Clinical relevance: Extraction of maxillary primary molars is possible without palatal injection by injecting 4% articaine or 2% lidocaine into the buccal vestibule of the tooth with a waiting time of 5 or 8 min.