Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,411 questions · 5,986 findings · 226 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 1,305 · 21.8%GRADE not reported 2,988 · 49.9%Very low 1,030 · 17.2%Low 476 · 8%Moderate 156 · 2.6%High 31 · 0.5%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

Amifostine vs no treatment/placebo

Adverse effects (other reported events) · Patients receiving radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region
1 finding from 1 review

Amifostine vs no treatment/placebo

Xerostomia (grade >= 2, 0-4 scale) · Patients receiving radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region

Amifostine may leads to lower xerostomia (grade >= 2, 0-4 scale) compared with no treatment/placebo (low certainty).

3 findings from 1 review

Periodontal treatment (scaling and root planing, polishing, or surgery), alone or with oral hygiene counselling, antiseptics, or antimicrobials vs no treatment

Preterm birth < 32 weeks · Pregnant women considered to have periodontal disease (gingivitis or periodontitis) after dental examination

It is very uncertain whether periodontal treatment (scaling and root planing, polishing, or… changes preterm birth < 32 weeks compared with no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Analgesic (any: NSAID, paracetamol, local anaesthetic or opioid) vs placebo or control

Rescue analgesia · People undergoing orthodontic treatment (any age; 9 to 34 years in included studies)
1 finding from 1 review

Resorbable (bioresorbable) plates or screws for fixation vs Titanium plates or screws for fixation

Re-operation and revision rate / plate removal (adverse effect) · Adults (>16 years old) undergoing orthognathic surgery
1 finding from 1 review
  • Resorbable versus titanium plates for orthognathic surgery 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 years postoperatively
    Plate removal rates were 1.53% (3/196) of the titanium plates and 3.63% (6/165) of the resorbable ones. Out of a total of nine, two in each group were removed because of plate exposure, one patient in the titanium and…
    1 study · 60 participants
    GRADE not reported

Polaprezinc vs Azulene oral rinse

Taste disturbance (severe, > 2 on 0-3 scale) · Patients receiving radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region

Polaprezinc led to lower taste disturbance (severe, > 2 on 0-3 scale) compared with azulene oral rinse; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Keratinocyte growth factor (KGF; palifermin or repifermin), intravenous vs placebo

Adverse effects · Patients receiving radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region
1 finding from 1 review

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

Abutment failure · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

It is very uncertain whether metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) changes abutment failure compared with metal implant abutments (titanium) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: bleeding on probing (Papilla Bleeding Index) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: bleeding on probing (Papilla Bleeding Index) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Decalcification · Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent molars; excludes prior…

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.

1 finding from 1 review

Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), mouthwash vs Sucralfate mouthwash

Normalcy of diet (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) · Adults receiving radiotherapy to the head and neck

Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), mouthwash showed no clear difference in normalcy of diet (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) compared with sucralfate mouthwash; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

G‐CSF vs placebo or no treatment

Oral mucositis (any severity) · Adults with cancer receiving treatment

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) led to lower oral mucositis (any severity) compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Antimicrobial lozenge vs placebo

Dry mouth (xerostomia) · Patients receiving radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region

Antimicrobial lozenge showed no clear difference in xerostomia compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Periodontal/peri-implant status (secondary outcomes) · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • No data were presented for any of the pre-specified secondary outcomes. The trial registered pocket depth, bleeding on probing and mobility at follow-up visits but did not report the data.
    0 studies
    No studies found

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: gingival recession (six-point probing) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: gingival recession (six-point probing) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Patient response: total discomfort score (pain, difficulty eating, brushing, speaking, bad taste) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: total discomfort score (pain, difficulty eating,… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review