All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data .
When given a choice between faces scales , children preferred the WBFPRS .
Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS .
: For clinical use , we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use .
CONTEXT : Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of  pain intensity in children .
It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity , reliability , feasibility , and preference .
OBJECTIVES : To summarize and systematic ally review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility .
Pain assessment by children and adolescents during intraosseous anaesthesia using a computerized system (QuickSleeper).
BACKGROUND Intraosseous ( IO ) anaesthesia has been shown to be effective in children . However , the pain associated with anaesthetic injections , and its acceptance by children , have never been studied . AIM The aim of this study was to assess the pain associated with the IO injection of 4 % articaine with 1 : 200 000 epinephrine using the computerized QuickSleeper ' system in a population of children and adolescents . DESIGN IO anaesthesia was performed on patients aged 10.4 + /- 2.6 years of age . The patients assessed their pain on a faces pain scale ( FPS ) and on a visual analogue scale ( VAS ) . The operators were also asked to assess signs of patient pain/discomfort . RESULTS No pain or mild discomfort was reported by , respectively , 81.8 % ( FPS ) and 83.9 % ( VAS ) of the patients . Some 58.9 % of children with previous experience of dental anaesthesia reported that computerized IO anaesthesia was more comfortable than traditional infiltration methods . Operators noted signs of discomfort during penetration and injection in 18.3 % and 25.3 % of the patients , respectively . CONCLUSIONS This study showed that the majority of children reported no pain or mild pain when anaesthetic was administered by computerized needle rotation and solution deposition . This technique holds promise for use by trained paediatric dentists
All 4 faces pain scales were found to be adequately supported by psychometric data .
When given a choice between faces scales , children preferred the WBFPRS .
Confounding of pain intensity with affect caused by use of smiling and crying anchor faces is a disadvantage of the WBFPRS .
: For clinical use , we found no grounds to switch from 1 faces scale to another when 1 of the scales is in use .
CONTEXT : Numerous faces scales have been developed for the measurement of  pain intensity in children .
It remains unclear whether any one of the faces scales is better for a particular purpose with regard to validity , reliability , feasibility , and preference .
OBJECTIVES : To summarize and systematic ally review faces pain scales most commonly used to obtain self-report of pain intensity in children for evaluation of reliability and validity and to compare the scales for preference and utility .