-
Value in Health : the Journal of the... Aug 2020To describe and summarize evidence on economic evaluations (EEs) of primary caries prevention in preschool children aged 2 to 5 years and to evaluate the reporting...
OBJECTIVES
To describe and summarize evidence on economic evaluations (EEs) of primary caries prevention in preschool children aged 2 to 5 years and to evaluate the reporting quality of full EE studies using a quality assessment tool.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted in several databases. Full and partial EEs were included. The reporting quality of full EE studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.
RESULTS
A total of 808 studies were identified, and 39 were included in the review. Most papers were published between 2000 and 2017 and originated in the United States and the United Kingdom. The most common type of intervention investigated was a complex multicomponent intervention, followed by water fluoridation. Cost analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis were the most frequently used types of EE. One study employed cost-utility analysis. The proportion of full EEs increased over time. The parameters not reported well included study perspective, baseline year, sensitivity analysis, and discount rate. The CHEERS items that were most often unmet were characterizing uncertainty, study perspective, study parameters, and estimating resources and costs.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the past 2 decades, there has been an increase in the number of EEs of caries prevention interventions in preschool children. There was inconsistency in how EEs were conducted and reported. Lack of preference-based health-related quality-of-life measure utilization in the field was identified. The use of appropriate study methodologies and greater attention to recommended EE design are required to further improve quality.
Topics: Child, Preschool; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dental Caries; Fluoridation; Humans; Patient Education as Topic; Pit and Fissure Sealants; Primary Prevention; United Kingdom; United States
PubMed: 32828224
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.04.1823 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015Proximal dental lesions, limited to dentine, are traditionally treated by invasive (drill and fill) means. Non-invasive alternatives (e.g. fluoride varnish, flossing)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Proximal dental lesions, limited to dentine, are traditionally treated by invasive (drill and fill) means. Non-invasive alternatives (e.g. fluoride varnish, flossing) might avoid substance loss but their effectiveness depends on patients' adherence. Recently, micro-invasive approaches for treating proximal caries lesions have been tried. These interventions install a barrier either on top (sealing) or within (infiltrating) the lesion. Different methods and materials are currently available for micro-invasive treatments, such as sealing via resin sealants, (polyurethane) patches/tapes, glass ionomer cements (GIC) or resin infiltration.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of micro-invasive treatments for managing proximal caries lesions in primary and permanent dentition in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases to 31 December 2014: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE via OVID, LILACs via BIREME Virtual Health Library, Web of Science Conference Proceedings, ZETOC Conference Proceedings, Proquest Dissertations and Theses, ClinicalTrials.gov, OpenGrey and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials to 1 October 2014. There were no language or date restrictions in the searches of the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of at least six months' duration that compared micro-invasive treatments for managing non-cavitated proximal dental decay in primary teeth, permanent teeth or both, versus non-invasive measures, invasive means, no intervention or placebo. We also included studies that compared different types of micro-invasive treatments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane to evaluate risk of bias and synthesise data. We conducted meta-analyses with the random-effects model, using the Becker-Balagtas method to calculate the odds ratio (OR) for lesion progression. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight trials, which randomised 365 participants. The trials all used a split-mouth design, some with more than one pair of lesions treated within the same participant. Studies took place in university or dental public health clinics in Brazil, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, Thailand, Greenland and Chile. Six studies evaluated the effects of micro-invasive treatments in the permanent dentition and two studies on the primary dentition, with caries risk ranging from low to high. Investigators measured caries risk in different studies either by caries experience alone or by using the Cariogram programme, which combines eight contributing factors, including caries experience, diet, saliva and other factors related to caries. The follow-up period in the trials ranged from one to three years. All studies used lesion progression as the primary outcome, evaluating it by different methods of reading radiographs. Four studies received industry support to carry out the research, with one of them being carried out by inventors of the intervention.We judged seven studies to be at high overall risk of bias, primarily due to lack of blinding of participants and personnel. We evaluated intervention effects for all micro-invasive therapies and analysed subgroups according to the different treatment methods reported in the included studies.Our meta-analysis, which pooled the most sensitive set of data (in terms of measurement method) from studies presenting data in a format suitable for meta-analysis, showed that micro-invasive treatment significantly reduced the odds of lesion progression compared with non-invasive treatment (e.g fluoride varnish) or oral hygiene advice (e.g to floss) (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.41; 602 lesions; seven studies; I(2) = 32%). There was no evidence of subgroup differences (P = 0.36).The four studies that measured adverse events reported no adverse events after micro-invasive treatment. Most studies did not report on any further outcomes.We assessed the quality of evidence for micro-invasive treatments as moderate. It remains unclear which micro-invasive treatment is more advantageous, or if certain clinical conditions or patient characteristics are better suited for micro-invasive treatments than others.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence shows that micro-invasive treatment of proximal caries lesions arrests non-cavitated enamel and initial dentinal lesions (limited to outer third of dentine, based on radiograph) and is significantly more effective than non-invasive professional treatment (e.g. fluoride varnish) or advice (e.g. to floss). We can be moderately confident that further research is unlikely to substantially change the estimate of effect. Due to the small number of studies, it does remain unclear which micro-invasive technique offers the greatest benefit, or whether the effects of micro-invasive treatment confer greater or lesser benefit according to different clinical or patient considerations.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Dental Care; Dental Caries; Dental Devices, Home Care; Dental Etching; Dentition, Permanent; Disease Progression; Female; Humans; Male; Pit and Fissure Sealants; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resins, Synthetic; Tooth, Deciduous
PubMed: 26545080
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010431.pub2 -
Lasers in Medical Science Apr 2024To investigate the in vivo and in situ effect of different types of lasers in prevention of enamel demineralization in high caries risk cases (around orthodontic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To investigate the in vivo and in situ effect of different types of lasers in prevention of enamel demineralization in high caries risk cases (around orthodontic brackets, around restoration and in caries susceptible pits and fissures). PubMed was searched using the following keyword sequence; (Laser therapy OR laser irradiation OR laser application) AND (enamel caries prevention OR enamel demineralization OR enamel remineralization OR early enamel caries OR early-enamel caries OR enamel resistance OR enamel decalcification OR white spot lesions WSLs OR incipient lesion OR enamel decay OR enamel Dissolution OR enamel microhardness) AND (clinical trial OR Randomized clinical trial OR In situ study). The latest literature search was ended by "30 January 2023". PubMed was used as a primary data base for study selection. Scopus, EBSCO, and Google scholar are checked in our study after results of systematic search on PubMed. Only duplicates were found. Two meta-analyses were carried out. The first, clinical meta-analysis on incidence of white spot lesions (WSLs) following CO2 laser irradiation of enamel. The second meta-analysis on ex-vivo/in situ effect of CO2 laser on microhardness of enamel. In each meta-analysis three studies were included. Risk of bias was assessed. The search identified eight studies (four ex-vivo and four clinical trials). Regarding the clinical meta-analysis, the overall standardized mean difference was 0.21 [ 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.15-0.30, p < 0.00001]. This indicates that the incidence of new WSLs in patients who received low power CO laser treatment was highly significantly lower than placebo groups. The heterogeneity was considerable (I = 71%). In the second meta-analysis, the overall standardized mean difference was 49.55 [ 95% confidence interval (CI): 37.74, 61.37, p < 0.00001]. This indicates that microhardness of enamel receiving low power (0.4-5 W) CO laser irradiation is highly significantly lower than control untreated enamel. The heterogeneity was substantial (I = 48%). Within the limitations of this study, Low level laser therapy concept with CO2 laser seems to be effective in preventing enamel caries.Prospero registration number: CRD42023437379.
Topics: Humans; Carbon Dioxide; Dental Caries Susceptibility; Lasers; Dental Caries; Low-Level Light Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38635085
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-024-04049-4 -
Scientific Reports Aug 2021To analyse clinical studies investigating coating agents such as sealants and other bonding materials to prevent the initiation or inhibit the progress of white spot... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
To analyse clinical studies investigating coating agents such as sealants and other bonding materials to prevent the initiation or inhibit the progress of white spot lesions (WSL) during orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Electronic databases (Pubmed, CENTRAL, EMBASE) were screened for studies. No language restrictions were applied. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were done in duplicate. Primary outcome included assessment of WSL with visual-tactile assessment and/or laser fluorescence measurements. Twenty-four studies with 1117 patients (age: 11-40 years) and 12,809 teeth were included. Overall, 34 different sealants or bonding materials were analysed. Fourteen studies analysed fluoride and 14 studies non-fluoride releasing materials. Meta-analysis for visual tactile assessment revealed that sealants significantly decreased the initiation of WSL compared to untreated control (RR [95%CI] = 0.70 [0.53; 0.93]; very low level of evidence). Materials releasing fluoride did not decrease initiation of WSL compared to those with no fluoride release (RR [95%CI] = 0.84 [0.70; 1.01]; very low level of evidence). For laser fluorescence measurements no meta-analysis could be performed. The use of sealants seems to be effective in preventing the initiation of post-orthodontic WSL. Furthermore, there is no evidence supporting that fluoride-releasing sealants or bonding materials are more effective than those without fluoride release. No gold standard prevention strategy to prevent WSL during treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances has been established yet. However, based on only a limited number of studies the use of sealants seems to be effective in preventing the initiation of post-orthodontic WSL.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Dental Caries; Dental Enamel; Dentin-Bonding Agents; Fluorides; Humans; Orthodontic Brackets; Pit and Fissure Sealants; Resins, Synthetic; Tooth Demineralization; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 34400668
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-95888-6