Question · asked by 1 review

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth): Postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (VAS score)

Population
Adults or children with a Class I or Class II resin-based composite restoration in a permanent posterior tooth
Intervention
Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration
Comparison
No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)
Outcome
Postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (VAS score)

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer,… led to lower postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (VAS score) compared with no liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth); GRADE not reported.

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 2 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)
Postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (VAS score) · Adults or children with a Class I or Class II resin-based composite restoration in a permanent posterior tooth · 1 week
Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer,… led to lower postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (VAS score) compared with no liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth); GRADE not reported.
Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin‐based composite restorations (2019) · Cochrane All outcomes
MD -0.33 [-0.43, -0.23]1 studyGRADE not reported
Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)
Postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (VAS score) · Adults or children with a Class I or Class II resin-based composite restoration in a permanent posterior tooth · 1 month
Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer,… led to lower postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (VAS score) compared with no liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth); GRADE not reported.
Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin‐based composite restorations (2019) · Cochrane All outcomes
MD -0.20 [-0.31, -0.09]1 studyGRADE not reported

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

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin‐based composite restorations
2019 · Cochrane All outcomes
2018-11Not listedNot assessed

The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.

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.