Question · asked by 1 review
Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment: Self- or observational assessment of intraoperative distress/pain/acceptance of treatment during provision of LA: pain-related behaviour during LA (negative vs positive behaviour; Frankl Behaviour Rating Scale)
- Population
- Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia
- Intervention
- Audiovisual distraction
- Comparison
- Conventional treatment
- Outcome
- Self- or observational assessment of intraoperative distress/pain/acceptance of treatment during provision of LA: pain-related behaviour during LA (negative vs positive behaviour; Frankl Behaviour Rating Scale)
It is very uncertain whether audiovisual distraction changes self- or observational assessment of intraoperative… compared with conventional treatment (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment Self- or observational assessment of intraoperative distress/pain/acceptance of treatment during provision of LA: pain-related behaviour during LA (negative vs positive behaviour; Frankl Behaviour Rating Scale) · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia · During LA It is very uncertain whether audiovisual distraction changes self- or observational assessment of intraoperative… compared with conventional treatment (very low certainty). Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental… (2020) · Cochrane All outcomes | RR 0.13 [0.03, 0.50] | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2019-05 | Not listed | Not assessed |
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.