Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

681 questions · 709 findings · 179 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 180 · 25.4%GRADE not reported 51 · 7.2%Very low 194 · 27.4%Low 144 · 20.3%Moderate 110 · 15.5%High 30 · 4.2%

Counter-stimulation and distraction (combined) vs Conventional treatment

Completion of dental treatment · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
During LA
Completion of dental treatment: included studies did not report on this outcome
Studies not reported
No studies found

Counter-stimulation and distraction (combined) vs Conventional treatment

Patient satisfaction: measured by questionnaires · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
During LA
Patient satisfaction: included studies did not report on this outcome
Studies not reported
No studies found

Video modelling acclimatisation for LA vs Oral hygiene video

Patient satisfaction: measured by questionnaires · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
In advance of LA
Patient satisfaction: included studies did not report on this outcome
Studies not reported
No studies found

Camouflage syringe vs Conventional syringe

Successful LA/painless treatment · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
During LA (injection is the intervention)
Successful LA/painless treatment: included studies did not report on this outcome
Studies not reported
No studies found

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

Adverse effects: pain on injection (solution deposition), Heft-Parker VAS 0-170 mm · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

Audiovisual distraction showed no clear difference in pain on injection (Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale, after… compared with conventional treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
During LA · VR box vs conventional
MD 0.04 [-0.41, 0.48]
1 study
GRADE not reported

Video modelling acclimatisation vs Acclimatisation in clinic (tell-show-do)

Completion of dental treatment · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
In advance of LA
Completion of dental treatment: included studies did not report on this outcome
Studies not reported
No studies found

The wand (computer-controlled LA delivery system) vs Sleeper One (electronic LA delivery system)

Adverse effects: pain on injection (solution deposition), Heft-Parker VAS 0-170 mm · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The wand (computer-controlled LA delivery system) showed no clear difference in pain on injection (self-reported; FACES Pain Scale Revised) compared with sleeper One (electronic LA delivery system); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
During LA (injection is the intervention)
MD 0.68 [-1.31, 2.67]
1 study · 112 participants
GRADE not reported

The wand (computer-controlled LA delivery system) vs other local anaesthetic

Completion of dental treatment · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
During LA (injection is the intervention)
Completion of dental treatment: included studies did not report on this outcome
Studies not reported
No studies found

Intervention not reported

Virological success · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in virological success (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.04 [0.99, 1.09]
10 studies · 2438 participants
High

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: pyrexia · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: pyrexia (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.65 [0.15, 2.73]
3 studies · 1799 participants
Low

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: raised transaminases · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention leads to lower severe adverse events: raised transaminases (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.52 [0.35, 0.78]
3 studies · 1299 participants
High

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: raised alkaline phosphatase · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: raised alkaline phosphatase (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.65 [0.17, 2.5]
1 study · 1007 participants
Low

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: raised amylase · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: raised amylase (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.4 [0.72, 2.73]
2 studies · 1071 participants
Low

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: raised triglycerides · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: raised triglycerides (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.1 [0.39, 3.13]
2 studies · 1071 participants
Low

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: neutropenia · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention leads to lower severe adverse events: neutropenia (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.48 [0.28, 0.82]
3 studies · 1799 participants
High

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: rash · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: rash (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.58 [0.34, 1]
7 studies · 2277 participants
Moderate

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT) · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 135 participants
Moderate

Intervention not reported

Severe adverse events: serum glutamic‐ pyruvic transaminase (SGPT) · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 135 participants
Moderate

Intervention not reported

Raised cholesterol · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in raised cholesterol (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 6.03 [0.75, 48.78]
1 study · 64 participants
Moderate

Intervention not reported

Mortality · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals

The intervention showed no clear difference in mortality (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.84 [0.59, 1.19]
8 studies · 2317 participants
Moderate