-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2022Glycaemic control is a key component in diabetes mellitus (diabetes) management. Periodontitis is the inflammation and destruction of the underlying supporting tissues... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Glycaemic control is a key component in diabetes mellitus (diabetes) management. Periodontitis is the inflammation and destruction of the underlying supporting tissues of the teeth. Some studies have suggested a bidirectional relationship between glycaemic control and periodontitis. Treatment for periodontitis involves subgingival instrumentation, which is the professional removal of plaque, calculus, and debris from below the gumline using hand or ultrasonic instruments. This is known variously as scaling and root planing, mechanical debridement, or non-surgical periodontal treatment. Subgingival instrumentation is sometimes accompanied by local or systemic antimicrobials, and occasionally by surgical intervention to cut away gum tissue when periodontitis is severe. This review is part one of an update of a review published in 2010 and first updated in 2015, and evaluates periodontal treatment versus no intervention or usual care. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of periodontal treatment on glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus and periodontitis.
SEARCH METHODS
An information specialist searched six bibliographic databases up to 7 September 2021 and additional search methods were used to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus and a diagnosis of periodontitis that compared subgingival instrumentation (sometimes with surgical treatment or adjunctive antimicrobial therapy or both) to no active intervention or 'usual care' (oral hygiene instruction, education or support interventions, and/or supragingival scaling (also known as PMPR, professional mechanical plaque removal)). To be included, the RCTs had to have lasted at least 3 months and have measured HbA1c (glycated haemoglobin).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently examined the titles and abstracts retrieved by the search, selected the included trials, extracted data from included trials, and assessed included trials for risk of bias. Where necessary and possible, we attempted to contact study authors. Our primary outcome was blood glucose levels measured as glycated (glycosylated) haemoglobin assay (HbA1c), which can be reported as a percentage of total haemoglobin or as millimoles per mole (mmol/mol). Our secondary outcomes included adverse effects, periodontal indices (bleeding on probing, clinical attachment level, gingival index, plaque index, and probing pocket depth), quality of life, cost implications, and diabetic complications.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 35 studies, which randomised 3249 participants to periodontal treatment or control. All studies used a parallel-RCT design and followed up participants for between 3 and 12 months. The studies focused on people with type 2 diabetes, other than one study that included participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Most studies were mixed in terms of whether metabolic control of participants at baseline was good, fair, or poor. Most studies were carried out in secondary care. We assessed two studies as being at low risk of bias, 14 studies at high risk of bias, and the risk of bias in 19 studies was unclear. We undertook a sensitivity analysis for our primary outcome based on studies at low risk of bias and this supported the main findings. Moderate-certainty evidence from 30 studies (2443 analysed participants) showed an absolute reduction in HbA1c of 0.43% (4.7 mmol/mol) 3 to 4 months after treatment of periodontitis (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.59% to -0.28%; -6.4 mmol/mol to -3.0 mmol/mol). Similarly, after 6 months, we found an absolute reduction in HbA1c of 0.30% (3.3 mmol/mol) (95% CI -0.52% to -0.08%; -5.7 mmol/mol to -0.9 mmol/mol; 12 studies, 1457 participants), and after 12 months, an absolute reduction of 0.50% (5.4 mmol/mol) (95% CI -0.55% to -0.45%; -6.0 mmol/mol to -4.9 mmol/mol; 1 study, 264 participants). Studies that measured adverse effects generally reported that no or only mild harms occurred, and any serious adverse events were similar in intervention and control arms. However, adverse effects of periodontal treatments were not evaluated in most studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our 2022 update of this review has doubled the number of included studies and participants, which has led to a change in our conclusions about the primary outcome of glycaemic control and in our level of certainty in this conclusion. We now have moderate-certainty evidence that periodontal treatment using subgingival instrumentation improves glycaemic control in people with both periodontitis and diabetes by a clinically significant amount when compared to no treatment or usual care. Further trials evaluating periodontal treatment versus no treatment/usual care are unlikely to change the overall conclusion reached in this review.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glycated Hemoglobin; Glycemic Control; Humans; Periodontal Index; Periodontitis
PubMed: 35420698
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004714.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2017Dental plaque associated gingivitis is a reversible inflammatory condition caused by accumulation and persistence of microbial biofilms (dental plaque) on the teeth. It... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dental plaque associated gingivitis is a reversible inflammatory condition caused by accumulation and persistence of microbial biofilms (dental plaque) on the teeth. It is characterised by redness and swelling of the gingivae (gums) and a tendency for the gingivae to bleed easily. In susceptible individuals, gingivitis may lead to periodontitis and loss of the soft tissue and bony support for the tooth. It is thought that chlorhexidine mouthrinse may reduce the build-up of plaque thereby reducing gingivitis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of chlorhexidine mouthrinse used as an adjunct to mechanical oral hygiene procedures for the control of gingivitis and plaque compared to mechanical oral hygiene procedures alone or mechanical oral hygiene procedures plus placebo/control mouthrinse. Mechanical oral hygiene procedures were toothbrushing with/without the use of dental floss or interdental cleaning aids and could include professional tooth cleaning/periodontal treatment.To determine whether the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse is influenced by chlorhexidine concentration, or frequency of rinsing (once/day versus twice/day).To report and describe any adverse effects associated with chlorhexidine mouthrinse use from included trials.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 28 September 2016); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 8) in the Cochrane Library (searched 28 September 2016); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 28 September 2016); Embase Ovid (1980 to 28 September 2016); and CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to 28 September 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of chlorhexidine mouthrinse used as an adjunct to mechanical oral hygiene procedures for at least 4 weeks on gingivitis in children and adults. Mechanical oral hygiene procedures were toothbrushing with/without use of dental floss or interdental cleaning aids and could include professional tooth cleaning/periodontal treatment. We included trials where participants had gingivitis or periodontitis, where participants were healthy and where some or all participants had medical conditions or special care needs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the search results extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We attempted to contact study authors for missing data or clarification where feasible. For continuous outcomes, we used means and standard deviations to obtain the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We combined MDs where studies used the same scale and standardised mean differences (SMDs) where studies used different scales. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs. Due to anticipated heterogeneity we used random-effects models for all meta-analyses.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 51 studies that analysed a total of 5345 participants. One study was assessed as being at unclear risk of bias, with the remaining 50 being at high risk of bias, however, this did not affect the quality assessments for gingivitis and plaque as we believe that further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Gingivitis After 4 to 6 weeks of use, chlorhexidine mouthrinse reduced gingivitis (Gingival Index (GI) 0 to 3 scale) by 0.21 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.31) compared to placebo, control or no mouthrinse (10 trials, 805 participants with mild gingival inflammation (mean score 1 on the GI scale) analysed, high-quality evidence). A similar effect size was found for reducing gingivitis at 6 months. There were insufficient data to determine the reduction in gingivitis associated with chlorhexidine mouthrinse use in individuals with mean GI scores of 1.1 to 3 (moderate or severe levels of gingival inflammation). Plaque Plaque was measured by different indices and the SMD at 4 to 6 weeks was 1.45 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.90) standard deviations lower in the chlorhexidine group (12 trials, 950 participants analysed, high-quality evidence), indicating a large reduction in plaque. A similar large reduction was found for chlorhexidine mouthrinse use at 6 months. Extrinsic tooth staining There was a large increase in extrinsic tooth staining in participants using chlorhexidine mouthrinse at 4 to 6 weeks. The SMD was 1.07 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.34) standard deviations higher (eight trials, 415 participants analysed, moderate-quality evidence) in the chlorhexidine mouthrinse group. There was also a large increase in extrinsic tooth staining in participants using chlorhexidine mouthrinse at 7 to 12 weeks and 6 months. Calculus Results for the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on calculus formation were inconclusive. Effect of concentration and frequency of rinsing There were insufficient data to determine whether there was a difference in effect for either chlorhexidine concentration or frequency of rinsing. Other adverse effects The adverse effects most commonly reported in the included studies were taste disturbance/alteration (reported in 11 studies), effects on the oral mucosa including soreness, irritation, mild desquamation and mucosal ulceration/erosions (reported in 13 studies) and a general burning sensation or a burning tongue or both (reported in nine studies).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high-quality evidence from studies that reported the Löe and Silness Gingival Index of a reduction in gingivitis in individuals with mild gingival inflammation on average (mean score of 1 on the 0 to 3 GI scale) that was not considered to be clinically relevant. There is high-quality evidence of a large reduction in dental plaque with chlorhexidine mouthrinse used as an adjunct to mechanical oral hygiene procedures for 4 to 6 weeks and 6 months. There is no evidence that one concentration of chlorhexidine rinse is more effective than another. There is insufficient evidence to determine the reduction in gingivitis associated with chlorhexidine mouthrinse use in individuals with mean GI scores of 1.1 to 3 indicating moderate or severe levels of gingival inflammation. Rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinse for 4 weeks or longer causes extrinsic tooth staining. In addition, other adverse effects such as calculus build up, transient taste disturbance and effects on the oral mucosa were reported in the included studies.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Child; Chlorhexidine; Dental Plaque; Dental Plaque Index; Dental Prophylaxis; Female; Gingivitis; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mouthwashes; Oral Hygiene; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Tooth Discoloration
PubMed: 28362061
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008676.pub2 -
Journal of Dentistry Dec 2016We systematically reviewed treatment modalities for MIH-affected molars and incisors. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
We systematically reviewed treatment modalities for MIH-affected molars and incisors.
DATA
Trials on humans with ≥1 MIH molar/incisor reporting on various treatments were included. Two authors independently searched and extracted records. Sample-size-weighted annual failure rates were estimated where appropriate. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
SOURCES
Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Google Scholar) were screened, and hand searches and cross-referencing performed.
STUDY SELECTION
Fourteen (mainly observational) studies were included. Ten trials (381 participants) investigated MIH-molars, four (139) MIH-incisors. For molars, remineralization, restorative or extraction therapies had been assessed. For restorative approaches, mean (SD) annual failure rates were highest for fissure sealants (12[6]%) and glass-ionomer restorations (12[2]%), and lowest for indirect restorations (1[3]%), preformed metal crowns (1.3 [2.1]%) and composite restorations (4[3]%). Ony study assessed extraction of molars in young patients (median age 8.2 years), the majority of them without malocclusions, but third molars in development. Spontaneous alignment of second molars was more frequent in the maxilla (55%) than the mandible (47%). For incisors, desensitizing agents successfully managed hypersensitivity. Micro-abrasion and composite veneers improved aesthetics.
CONCLUSIONS
Few, mainly moderate to high-risk-studies investigated treatment of MIH. Remineralization or sealants seem suitable for MIH-molars with limited severity and/or hypersensitivity. For severe cases, restorations with composites or indirect restorations or preformed metal crowns seem suitable. Prior to tooth extraction as last resort factors like the presence of a general malocclusion, patients' age and the status of neighboring teeth should be considered. No recommendations can be given for MIH-incisors.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Dentists need to consider the specific condition of each tooth and the needs and expectations of patients when deciding how to manage MIH. Strong recommendations are not possible based on the current evidence.
Topics: Dental Calculus; Dental Enamel Hypoplasia; Humans; Incisor; Maxilla; Molar; Pit and Fissure Sealants
PubMed: 27693779
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.09.012 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2018Periodontitis is a bacterially-induced, chronic inflammatory disease that destroys the connective tissues and bone that support teeth. Active periodontal treatment aims... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Periodontitis is a bacterially-induced, chronic inflammatory disease that destroys the connective tissues and bone that support teeth. Active periodontal treatment aims to reduce the inflammatory response, primarily through eradication of bacterial deposits. Following completion of treatment and arrest of inflammation, supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) is employed to reduce the probability of re-infection and progression of the disease; to maintain teeth without pain, excessive mobility or persistent infection in the long term, and to prevent related oral diseases.According to the American Academy of Periodontology, SPT should include all components of a typical dental recall examination, and importantly should also include periodontal re-evaluation and risk assessment, supragingival and subgingival removal of bacterial plaque and calculus, and re-treatment of any sites showing recurrent or persistent disease. While the first four points might be expected to form part of the routine examination appointment for periodontally healthy patients, the inclusion of thorough periodontal evaluation, risk assessment and subsequent treatment - normally including mechanical debridement of any plaque or calculus deposits - differentiates SPT from routine care.Success of SPT has been reported in a number of long-term, retrospective studies. This review aimed to assess the evidence available from randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) in the maintenance of the dentition of adults treated for periodontitis.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 8 May 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 8 May 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 8 May 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating SPT versus monitoring only or alternative approaches to mechanical debridement; SPT alone versus SPT with adjunctive interventions; different approaches to or providers of SPT; and different time intervals for SPT delivery.We excluded split-mouth studies where we considered there could be a risk of contamination.Participants must have completed active periodontal therapy at least six months prior to randomisation and be enrolled in an SPT programme. Trials must have had a minimum follow-up period of 12 months.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened search results to identify studies for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted study data. When possible, we calculated mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous variables. Two review authors assessed the quality of evidence for each comparison and outcome using GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four trials involving 307 participants aged 31 to 85 years, who had been previously treated for moderate to severe chronic periodontitis. Three studies compared adjuncts to mechanical debridement in SPT versus debridement only. The adjuncts were local antibiotics in two studies (one at high risk of bias and one at low risk) and photodynamic therapy in one study (at unclear risk of bias). One study at high risk of bias compared provision of SPT by a specialist versus general practitioner. We did not identify any RCTs evaluating the effects of SPT versus monitoring only, or of providing SPT at different time intervals, or that compared the effects of mechanical debridement using different approaches or technologies.No included trials measured our primary outcome 'tooth loss'; however, studies evaluated signs of inflammation and potential periodontal disease progression, including bleeding on probing (BoP), clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD).There was no evidence of a difference between SPT delivered by a specialist versus a general practitioner for BoP or PPD at 12 months (very low-quality evidence). This study did not measure CAL or adverse events.Due to heterogeneous outcome reporting, it was not possible to combine data from the two studies comparing mechanical debridement with or without the use of adjunctive local antibiotics. Both studies found no evidence of a difference between groups at 12 months (low to very low-quality evidence). There were no adverse events in either study.The use of adjunctive photodynamic therapy did not demonstrate evidence of benefit compared to mechanical debridement only (very low-quality evidence). Adverse events were not measured.The quality of the evidence is low to very low for these comparisons. Future research is likely to change the findings, therefore the results should be interpreted with caution.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, there is insufficient evidence to determine the superiority of different protocols or adjunctive strategies to improve tooth maintenance during SPT. No trials evaluated SPT versus monitoring only. The evidence available for the comparisons evaluated is of low to very low quality, and hampered by dissimilarities in outcome reporting. More trials using uniform definitions and outcomes are required to address the objectives of this review.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chronic Periodontitis; Dental Plaque; Humans; Middle Aged; Periodontal Debridement; Periodontics; Photochemotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth Loss
PubMed: 29291254
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009376.pub2 -
Journal of International Society of... 2023The use of medicinal herbs to prevent gingival and periodontal diseases has become increasingly popular due to their anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. This... (Review)
Review
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The use of medicinal herbs to prevent gingival and periodontal diseases has become increasingly popular due to their anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. This systematic review aims to provide the current literature to validate the traditional use of medicinal herbs in the management of gingival and periodontal diseases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An online literature search was conducted to identify research papers published from 2010 to 2022 in three major scientific databases, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, in June 2022. Original research studies, case reports, and systematic reviews on medicinal plants' application in oral health care were selected to be included in this systematic review. Only high-quality articles identified in the quality assessment were included for evidence synthesis.
RESULTS
Initial keyword research yielded 726 free-text articles published between 2010 and 2022. Of these, 14 articles (8 research papers and 6 reviews) were included for evidence synthesis. The review's findings indicate that the antibacterial property of medicinal plants is due to their alkaline nature and prevents plaque and calculus formation by maintaining acid-alkali balance in saliva. Various parts of medicinal plants help maintain periodontal health. , , and effectively inhibit primary plaque colonizers and periodontal pathogens. , Miller, and have excellent applications in treating periodontal diseases. , , the husk of , the root of and , leaves of and , fruits of and , Ocimum extract, and pomegranate peel extract can serve as a promising alternative in managing chronic gingivitis.
CONCLUSION
The anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antibacterial, and astringent action of extracts obtained from various parts of medicinal plants make them effective in reducing gingival and periodontal diseases. Herbal medicine may be a viable alternative to contemporary pharmaceuticals as an adjuvant to scaling and root planning procedures.
PubMed: 37153928
DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_210_22 -
Advances in Nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) Nov 2015The aim of this systematic review was to identify and summarize evidence of the association between anthropometric measurements and periodontal status in children and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this systematic review was to identify and summarize evidence of the association between anthropometric measurements and periodontal status in children and adolescents. We searched PubMed, Institute for Scientific Information Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Library, and 7 additional databases, following the guidance of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, up to December 2014. Observational studies reporting data on the association between anthropometric measurements and periodontal diseases in 2-18-y-old participants were included. An initial search identified 4191 papers; 278 potentially effective studies (k = 0.82) and 16 effective studies (k = 0.83) were included after screening. The mean quality of evidence among the studies was 20.3, according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology checklist (k = 0.79). Meta-analyses showed that obesity (measured by body mass index) was significantly associated with visible plaque index (OR: 4.75; 95% CI: 2.42, 9.34), bleeding on probing (OR: 5.41; 95% CI: 2.75, 10.63), subgingival calculus (OR: 3.07; 95% CI: 1.10, 8.62), probing depth (OR: 14.15; 95% CI: 5.10, 39.25) and flow rate of salivary secretion (standardized mean difference: -0.89; 95% CI: -1.18, -0.61). However, various results were reported in the effective studies that were not included in meta-analyses. In conclusion, obesity is associated with some signs of periodontal disease in children and adolescents. Further studies with a comprehensive prospective cohort design and more potential variables are recommended.
Topics: Adolescent; Anthropometry; Body Mass Index; Child; Child, Preschool; Dental Plaque; Energy Intake; Gingivitis; Humans; Inflammation; Obesity; Periodontal Diseases; Periodontal Index; Salivation
PubMed: 26567204
DOI: 10.3945/an.115.010017 -
Cureus Mar 2022Mouthwash is the effective chemical plaque control mechanism being practiced globally. Teeth and tongue discoloration, a temporary change in taste perception, an... (Review)
Review
Mouthwash is the effective chemical plaque control mechanism being practiced globally. Teeth and tongue discoloration, a temporary change in taste perception, an increase in calculus deposits, a burning sensation, and genotoxicity of buccal epithelial cells are all possible side effects. This review evaluates the efficacy of chitosan mouthwash in comparison to chlorhexidine mouthwash in combating plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation. Electronic databases such as Medline, Cochrane, LILACS, TRIP, Google scholar, and clinical trial registries (CTRI) for ongoing trials were searched with appropriate medical subheadings (MeSH) and search terms. Randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy of chitosan mouthwash and chlorhexidine mouthwash on dental plaque accumulation and gingivitis were included. The outcome variables of interest were plaque index, gingival index, gingival bleeding index, and colony-forming unit (CFU/ml). All data from the included studies were extracted in a customized extraction sheet. The risk of bias across the studies was assessed using the Cochrane tool for intervention (ROB-2), which consisted of six domains. Of the included three studies, we found one study with an overall low risk of bias and two studies with an overall high risk of bias across the domains. Though there was a significant reduction in plaque accumulation, gingival inflammation, and colony-forming units on the use of chitosan mouthwash and chlorhexidine mouthwash separately, all three included studies reported that a combination of both be more effective.
PubMed: 35464533
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.23318 -
Heliyon Dec 2019The aim of the present systematic review was to examine the scientific evidence for the efficacy of stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF) dentifrice in relation to dental... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the present systematic review was to examine the scientific evidence for the efficacy of stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF) dentifrice in relation to dental calculus, dental plaque, gingivitis, halitosis and staining.
DATA AND SOURCES
Medline OVID, Embase.com, and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception until June 2017. Six researchers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. A meta-analysis of the 6-month gingivitis studies was done. Risk of bias was estimated using a checklist from the Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment (SBU, 2018).
STUDY SELECTION
Two studies on dental calculus, 21 on dental plaque and gingivitis, 4 on halitosis, and 5 on stain met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was high for the studies on dental calculus, halitosis, and stain, and varied for the dental plaque and gingivitis studies. Significant reductions in dental calculus and in halitosis were reported for the SnF dentifrice; no differences in stain reduction were noted. A meta-analysis on gingivitis found better results for the SnF dentifrice compared to other dentifrices, though the results of the individual trials in the meta-analyses showed a substantial heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS
The present review found that stabilized SnF toothpaste had a positive effect on the reduction of dental calculus build-up, dental plaque, gingivitis, stain and halitosis. A tendency towards a more pronounced effect than using toothpastes not containing SnF2 was found. However, a new generation of well conducted randomized trials are needed to further support these findings.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Adding a SnF toothpaste to the daily oral care routine is an easy strategy that may have multiple oral health benefits.
PubMed: 31872105
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02850 -
International Journal of Paediatric... Nov 2022Children and adolescents with vision impairment (VI) may be at increased risk of oral health issues, such as periodontal inflammation, poor oral hygiene, dental caries,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Children and adolescents with vision impairment (VI) may be at increased risk of oral health issues, such as periodontal inflammation, poor oral hygiene, dental caries, and dental trauma, but this is inconclusive in the literature.
AIM
To systematically review the literature to determine the main oral health issues of children and adolescents with VI compared to those without VI.
DESIGN
Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify observational studies involving children and adolescents with and without VI, to determine and compare their oral health issues. The methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Studies that had homogeneity of methods were incorporated into meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Fifteen cross-sectional studies were included. Overall, most studies presented methodological flaws and high risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed that children and adolescents with VI were 3.86 times as likely to exhibit dental trauma (OR = 3.86, 95% CI = 2.63-5.68, I = 0%) and had higher/poorer values for plaque (MD = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.58-1.02, I = 96%), gingivitis (MD = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.02-1.37, I = 100%), calculus (MD = 0.04, 95% CI = 0.03-0.06, I = 0%), and oral hygiene indices (MD = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.24-1.18, I = 97%), as well as DMFS (MD = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.68-1.13, I = 26%).
CONCLUSION
Across a wide array of assessments, children and adolescents with vision impairment had worse oral health outcomes than those without VI.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dental Caries; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Humans; Oral Health
PubMed: 35445456
DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12967 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene Feb 2018It is estimated that about 20%-25% of the world's population are suffering from periodontal diseases or severe gum diseases. This requires appropriate interventions. For... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
It is estimated that about 20%-25% of the world's population are suffering from periodontal diseases or severe gum diseases. This requires appropriate interventions. For the development of effective and evidence-based programmes tailored to the target group, the aim of this review was to survey to the effectiveness of oral health education and promotion interventions in the relevant groups of people.
METHODS
The electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of science and Cochrane Library were searched for English language studies between 2010 and (January-December) 2016. To assess the quality of articles, the checklist was used that includes 19 items. Studies were selected based on PICOs criteria, and finally, 16 studies were entered in our study.
RESULTS
A total of 16 articles were selected, classified into two groups (A and B groups), so that group A with short-term effects includes improving knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, oral health behaviour (toothbrushing and flossing), theoretical constructs (perceived susceptibility, perceived severity and perceived behavioural control) which consists of 15 articles and group B with long-term effects includes improving decayed teeth, plaque, calculus and bleeding which consists of six articles.
CONCLUSION
Approximately, this study supports effectiveness of all oral health education and promotion interventions, especially in short-term outcomes. Regarding the importance of long-term and short-term outcomes for oral health education and promotion programmes, These interventions could be performed in the future with several target groups including family and teachers.
Topics: Health Education, Dental; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Health Promotion; Humans; Oral Health; Self Efficacy
PubMed: 28834249
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12305