-
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 -
Journal of the American Dental... Oct 2017For this systematic review, the authors evaluated and synthesized the available scientific evidence related to the effects of periodontal endoscopy on the treatment of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
For this systematic review, the authors evaluated and synthesized the available scientific evidence related to the effects of periodontal endoscopy on the treatment of periodontitis.
METHODS
The authors searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Chinese Scientific Journals database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chinese Medicine Premier's Wanfang database for articles about periodontal endoscopy that were published through January 2017. The authors considered the percentage of residual calculus, average treatment time, bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival inflammation (GI), and probing depth (PD) as outcome measures. The authors extracted data and performed meta-analyses for groups of articles for which it was appropriate.
RESULTS
The authors identified 8 articles as being suitable for this systematic review. The investigators of 3 studies reported results related to BOP and GI that revealed some advantages of periodontal endoscopy over traditional scaling and root planing (SRP). The investigators of 4 studies explored PD and found no difference between periodontal endoscopy and traditional SRP. The authors could not perform meta-analyses on the study results related to BOP, GI, or PD. The percentage of residual calculus after periodontal endoscope-aided debridement was significantly less than the percentage of residual calculus after traditional SRP (mean difference, -3.18; 95% confidence interval, -4.86 to -1.49; P = .002; heterogeneity I = 74%). The authors found that periodontal endoscopy took significantly more time than traditional SRP (mean difference, 6.01 minutes; 95% confidence interval, 4.23 to 7.8; P < .00001; heterogeneity I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Periodontal endoscopy may provide additional benefits for calculus removal compared with traditional SRP, although it could take more time to perform. With respect to BOP, GI, and PD, the authors found no sufficient evidence to support the difference between the use of periodontal endoscopy and traditional SRP. The authors concluded that additional scientific research is required to assess the effects of periodontal endoscopy on the treatment of periodontitis.
Topics: Chronic Periodontitis; Dental Scaling; Endoscopy; Humans; Root Planing
PubMed: 28637585
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2017.05.011 -
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 -
European Journal of Orthodontics Aug 2017The maintenance of gingival health around orthodontic fixed retainers (FRs) is difficult and different designs have been proposed. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The maintenance of gingival health around orthodontic fixed retainers (FRs) is difficult and different designs have been proposed.
OBJECTIVE
The goal of this systematic review was to analyse whether FR designs that allow unobstructed interproximal flossing, compared with the ones that do not, improve gingival parameters.
SEARCH METHODS
Detailed individual database search strategies for Cochrane Library, 'Latin' American and 'Caribbean' Health Sciences Literature, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were developed. Grey literature was also considered.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Clinical trials and cross-sectional studies that compared two types of FRs (plain and waved) were included and evaluated.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias (RoB) assessment were performed individually and in duplicate. The methodology quality was assessed using the MAStARI RoB tool.
RESULTS
Four studies met the inclusion criteria, and all presented moderate RoB. While two of those studies found a statistically significant difference in gingival parameters, the other two did not report differences. A meta-analysis was conducted based on two of the selected studies, which performed evaluations of plaque index (PI) and calculus index (CI). The results revealed no differences on PI between wave FR and plain FR of 0.46 (0.24 to 0.69) and no differences on CI of 0.12 (-0.10 to 0.33). Regarding comfort, no clear differences were identified.
CONCLUSIONS
There is not enough scientific evidence to support or not an association between FR design and gingival health, flossing frequency, or patient comfort.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO - CRD42016030059.
Topics: Cross-Sectional Studies; Dental Devices, Home Care; Dental Plaque Index; Gingival Diseases; Humans; Oral Hygiene; Orthodontic Appliance Design; Orthodontic Retainers
PubMed: 27629261
DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjw057 -
Fogorvosi Szemle Mar 2016The removal of dental plaque plays an essential role in the maintenance of oral health. Numerous powered and manual toothbrushes were manufactured to achieve this goal,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The removal of dental plaque plays an essential role in the maintenance of oral health. Numerous powered and manual toothbrushes were manufactured to achieve this goal, but even up to this day different opinions and research results have been revealed to assess the priority of the mentioned devices.
AIM
Comparison of powered and manual toothbrushes on the basis of periodontal parameters and safety.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Electronic search of the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE (until May 2014) was carried out with the help of keywords in order to find relevant trials. The inclusion criteria were as follows: randomised controlled clinical trials, adult population, the presence of at least 15 permanent teeth. Split-mouth trials and interventions carried out by dental professionals, were excluded. Primary outcomes were the changes of plaque and gingival indices, while secondary outcomes were probing pocket depth (PPD), safety and quality assessment. The effect-size of the interventions was expressed by the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Random-effects models were performed.
RESULTS
Electronic search resulted in 173 hits. 21 trials with the total number of 1500 subjects were then eligible for the meta-analysis. Both toothbrushes were safe, without considerable side effects on soft or hard tissues. Powered toothbrushes seemed to be generally more effective in removing plaque (-9%), reducing gingivitis (-6%) and preventing calculus formation. The SMDs for plaque and gingival indices were -0,40 (95% Cl: -0,95 to -0,16) and -0,29 (95% Cl: -0,56 to -0,03) respectively, in favour of the powered devices. There was no significant difference in changes of PPD. By further dividing the powered toothbrushes according to their mode of action, the plaque removal effect of the rotation oscillation (plus three dimensional), side to side sonic and ultrasonic toothbrushes seemed to be significantly better, than their manual ones, while the counter oscillation and the ionic toothbrushes did not perform better. Quality assessment and sensitivity analysis revealed various types of bias up to a certain extent. Consequently, no trial was found to be eligible for the highest quality criteria.
CONCLUSIONS
The investigated rotation oscillation and vibrating toothbrushes appeared to be statistically more effective than their manual counterparts, although there is little known about its clinical relevance. The advantage of the electric toothbrushes disappears in case of adequately instructed and motivated patients that highlights the importance of individualised oral hygiene education. The design of the trials shows high heterogeneity, therefore their clinical implications should be handled carefully.
Topics: Dental Calculus; Dental Devices, Home Care; Dental Plaque; Electricity; Equipment Design; Gingivitis; Humans; Oral Hygiene; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rotation; Toothbrushing; Ultrasonics
PubMed: 27188156
DOI: No ID Found -
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