What do systematic reviews say?

Ozonisation vs No ozonisation / standard operatory

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Ultraviolet (UV) light air decontamination vs No UV light / standard operatory

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Any method, procedure or policy to reduce contaminated aerosols in dental clinics vs Any other method, no treatment or combination of methods

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Fumigation or fogging vs No fumigation or fogging / standard operatory

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Any method, procedure or policy to reduce contaminated aerosols in dental clinics vs Any other method, no treatment or combination of methods

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Reduction in volume of contaminated aerosols in the operative environment: Not reported (row present in all Summary of findings tables)
  0 studies
  No studies found

Ionisation (ionic air purifier) vs No ionisation / standard operatory

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Any method, procedure or policy to reduce contaminated aerosols in dental clinics vs Any other method, no treatment or combination of methods

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Rate of infection of dental staff or patients: Not reported (row present in all Summary of findings tables)
  0 studies
  No studies found

Diode laser vs electrosurgery

It is very uncertain whether diode laser changes clinical failure compared with electrosurgery (very low certainty).

• Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes

  6 months
  RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.70]
  2 studies · 50 participants
  Very low

Diode laser vs electrosurgery

Diode laser showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with electrosurgery (low certainty).

• Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes

  6 months
  RR 0.64 [0.19, 2.18]
  2 studies · 50 participants
  Low

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)

• Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No other adverse events identified
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

One type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes (chemically-cured composite, light-cured composite, conventional glass ionomer, poly-acid modified composite/compomer, or resin-modified glass ionomer) vs Any other type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) led to higher decalcification (participant level) compared with molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement); GRADE not reported.

• Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  RR 1.85 [1.22, 2.79]
  1 study · 74 participants
  GRADE not reported

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) led to higher first time failure at participant level compared with molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement); GRADE not reported.

• Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  RR 2.30 [1.56, 3.41]
  2 studies · 186 participants
  GRADE not reported

One type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes (chemically-cured composite, light-cured composite, conventional glass ionomer, poly-acid modified composite/compomer, or resin-modified glass ionomer) vs Any other type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) led to higher first time failure at tooth level compared with molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement); GRADE not reported.

• Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  HR 2.92 [1.80, 4.72]
  2 studies · 190 participants
  GRADE not reported

Perioperative infraorbital nerve block vs Infiltration of the incision (peri-incisional infiltration)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Infraorbital nerve block for postoperative pain following cleft lip repair in children 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  This outcome was not reported.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Perioperative infraorbital nerve block vs Intravenous analgesia

• Infraorbital nerve block for postoperative pain following cleft lip repair in children 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  2 out of 3 studies reported this outcome. Both studies reported no difference between groups (Rajamani 2007 and Simion 2008: no adverse events attributable to either technique; Delgado 2005 did not report).
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

Perioperative infraorbital nerve block vs Infiltration of the incision (peri-incisional infiltration)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Infraorbital nerve block for postoperative pain following cleft lip repair in children 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The included studies did not report this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Perioperative infraorbital nerve block vs Intravenous analgesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Infraorbital nerve block for postoperative pain following cleft lip repair in children 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the included studies reported this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Perioperative infraorbital nerve block vs Intravenous analgesia

It is very uncertain whether perioperative infraorbital nerve block changes pain measured by valid instruments (mean postoperative pain score) compared with intravenous analgesia (very low certainty).

• Infraorbital nerve block for postoperative pain following cleft lip repair in children 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes

  0 to 4 hours (first four hours after surgery)
  SMD -1.50 [-2.40, -0.60]
  2 studies · 107 participants
  Very low