evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

7 questions · 7 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 42.9%Low 4 · 57.1%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Fluoride varnish vs Non-fluoride (placebo) varnish

Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond)

Professionally-applied fluoride varnish (7700 or 10,000 ppm F),… showed no clear difference in number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) compared with non-fluoride (placebo) varnish (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Resin-modified glass ionomer cement for bonding orthodontic brackets vs Composite resin for bonding brackets

Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond)

Resin-modified glass ionomer cement for bonding orthodontic brackets showed no clear difference in number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) compared with light-cured composite resin for bonding brackets (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

12,500 ppm F (NaF/olaflur/dectaflur) amine fluoride gel, professionally applied every 3 months plus home use vs Placebo gel

Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond)

It is very uncertain whether 12,500 ppm F (NaF/olaflur/dectaflur) amine fluoride gel,… changes number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) compared with 0 ppm F placebo gel (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) vs Fluoride mouthrinse

Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond)

It is very uncertain whether intraoral fluoride-releasing glass bead device attached to the brace changes number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) compared with 250 ppm F (daily) fluoride mouthrinse (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Patient-used 250 ppm F mouthrinse (100 ppm amine F/150 ppm NaF), daily vs 0 ppm F placebo mouthrinse, daily

Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond)

It is very uncertain whether patient-used 250 ppm F mouthrinse (100 ppm amine F/150 ppm NaF), daily changes number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) compared with 0 ppm F placebo mouthrinse, daily (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Patient-used 5000 ppm F toothpaste, daily vs 1450 to 1500 ppm F toothpaste

Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond)

Patient-used 5000 ppm F toothpaste, daily throughout treatment showed no clear difference in number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) compared with 1450 ppm F (conventional) toothpaste, daily (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Professionally-applied 12,300 ppm F APF foam, every 2 months vs 0 ppm F placebo foam

Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond)

Professionally-applied 12,300 ppm F APF foam, every 2 months may leads to lower number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) compared with 0 ppm F placebo foam (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review