Question · asked by 1 review

HVGIC with chlorhexidine cavity disinfectant vs HVGIC without cavity disinfectant: Restoration failure

Population
Children with carious primary teeth
Intervention
HVGIC with chlorhexidine cavity disinfectant
Comparison
HVGIC without cavity disinfectant
Outcome
Restoration failure

No comparative effect estimate was reported; cavity disinfectant did not affect success in the review narrative.

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
HVGIC with chlorhexidine cavity disinfectant vs HVGIC without cavity disinfectant
Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth · 2 years, School setting, ART; Class I and II
No comparative effect estimate was reported; cavity disinfectant did not affect success in the review narrative.
Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth without pulp… (2022) All outcomes
Annual failure rate (%) without disinfectant 9.1%; with disinfectant 11.1% (cumulative)1 study · 126 participantsGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

Studies behind the findings

The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.