Search

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

397 questions · 449 findings · 37 reviews · Dental caries · related questions CL0289

No studies found 39 · 8.7%GRADE not reported 245 · 54.6%Very low 72 · 16%Low 42 · 9.4%Moderate 51 · 11.4%High 0 · 0%

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Implant probing pocket depth (PPD) · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) showed no clear difference in implant probing pocket depth (PPD) compared with metal implant abutments (titanium); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free implant-supported FDPs (zirconia-toughened alumina; In-Ceram Zirconia) vs Metal-free implant-supported FDPs (yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia; Denzir)

Bridge failure · Adults (18 years or older) needing an implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis in the posterior region
1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free implant-supported FDPs (zirconia-toughened alumina; In-Ceram Zirconia) vs Metal-free implant-supported FDPs (yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia; Denzir)

Aesthetics · Adults (18 years or older) needing an implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis in the posterior region

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (pressed veneering ceramic) vs Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (layered veneering ceramic)

Bridge failure · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prosthesis
1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Bridge failure · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

It is very uncertain whether metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) changes bridge failure compared with metal-ceramic FDPs (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Metal-free FDPs (zirconia ceramic) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

It is very uncertain whether metal-free FDPs (zirconia ceramic) changes aesthetic evaluation (patient aesthetic satisfaction changes) compared with metal-ceramic FDPs (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (pressed veneering ceramic) vs Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (layered veneering ceramic)

Bridge complications · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prosthesis

It is very uncertain whether metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (pressed veneering ceramic) changes bridge complications compared with metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (layered veneering ceramic) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Aesthetics · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown
1 finding from 1 review
  • Primary outcome aesthetic evaluation data were reported as the frequency of distribution of the Implant Crown Aesthetic Index (ICAI); no comparative summary estimate was presented.
    2 studies · 47 participants
    Very low

Metal-free cantilevered FDPs (feldspathic-veneered zirconia) vs Metal-ceramic cantilevered FDPs

Aesthetics evaluated by the patient · Adults (18 years or older) needing replacement of one premolar or incisor with a cantilevered fixed dental prosthesis

It is very uncertain whether metal-free cantilevered FDPs (feldspathic-veneered zirconia) changes aesthetic evaluation (patient VAS) compared with metal-ceramic cantilevered FDPs (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs Not specified

Remineralisation of early enamel caries · Children with early (incipient) enamel caries

One trial found sodium fluoride gel significantly remineralised early enamel caries; ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Partial caries removal (single stage; residual dentinal caries sealed into the tooth definitively) vs Complete caries removal

Pulp exposure during caries removal · Patients with carious teeth, affecting any tooth surface(s), in unrestored primary and permanent teeth

Partial caries removal (single stage; residual dentinal caries… probably leads to lower pulp exposure during caries removal compared with complete caries removal (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Partial caries removal (single stage; residual dentinal caries sealed into the tooth definitively) vs Complete caries removal

Restoration failure · Patients with carious teeth, affecting any tooth surface(s), in unrestored primary and permanent teeth

It is very uncertain whether partial caries removal (single stage; residual dentinal caries… changes failure of restorations compared with complete caries removal (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Stepwise excavation (two-stage caries removal, re-entry after an interval) vs Complete caries removal

Pulp exposure during caries removal · Patients with carious teeth, affecting any tooth surface(s), in unrestored primary and permanent teeth

Stepwise excavation (two-stage caries removal, re-entry after an… probably leads to lower pulp exposure during caries removal compared with one stage complete caries removal (moderate certainty).

3 findings from 1 review

DHAT-delivered dental care vs Dentist-delivered dental care

Technical performance / deficient restorations (DHATs vs dentists) · Alaska Native dental patients (children aged 6-17 and adults) and their caregivers

DHATs had a lower amalgam restoration deficiency rate than dentists (12% vs 22%; certainty not graded).

3 findings from 1 review

DHAT-delivered dental care vs Not applicable (single-group prevalence)

Clinical care quality · Alaska dental health aide therapists

Four newly trained DHATs met stated clinical care standards in a qualitative evaluation, without a GRADE rating.

1 finding from 1 review