Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

135 questions · 156 findings · 30 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 66 · 42.3%GRADE not reported 61 · 39.1%Very low 15 · 9.6%Low 13 · 8.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 1 · 0.6%

Fluoride varnish vs Fluoride mouthrinse

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride varnish showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs) compared with fluoride mouthrinse; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Topical fluoride therapy (toothpaste, mouthrinse, gel or varnish; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Unacceptability of treatment (dropouts/exclusions during the trial) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Topical fluoride therapy (toothpaste, mouthrinse, gel or varnish;… showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (dropouts/exclusions during the trial) compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Ion-releasing restoration, glass ionomer-based (conventional GIC, HV-GIC, RMGIC, glass hybrid) vs Resin composite restoration

Secondary caries · Patients with permanent dentition in need of restorations (all cavity types: Black's Class I, II, V, and non-carious cervical lesions)

Pooled across follow-up periods, ion-releasing (GIC) and resin composite restorations show no significant difference in secondary caries (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00; not separately GRADE-rated).

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

Ion-releasing restoration (glass ionomer-based and compomer/polyacid-modified composite) vs Resin composite restoration

Secondary caries (caries around restorations), load-bearing cavities · Patients with permanent dentition in need of restorations in load-bearing cavities (Class I/II posterior)

In load-bearing cavities, ion-releasing (GIC and compomer) and resin composite restorations show no significant difference in secondary caries (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

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

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

Video modelling acclimatisation showed no clear difference in pre- and post-operative anxiety measures (Venham's scale) compared with acclimatisation in clinic (tell-show-do); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Hypnosis vs Conventional treatment

Physical/verbal resistance and self-reported pain during LA (other studies) · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

Hypnosis led to lower physical/verbal resistance and self-reported pain during LA (other… compared with conventional treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Adverse effects · 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

Electrical counter-stimulation device (DentalVibe) vs Conventional treatment (no stimulation)

Adverse effects · 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

Video modelling acclimatisation for LA vs Oral hygiene video

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

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

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

Counter-stimulation or distraction 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

Counter-stimulation and distraction (combined) vs Conventional treatment

Adverse effects · 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

Electrical counter-stimulation device (DentalVibe) vs Conventional treatment (no stimulation)

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

Counter-stimulation and distraction (combined) vs Conventional treatment

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

Hypnosis 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

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

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

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

Patient perception: pain · 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 perception during the intervention (pooled) compared with traditional local anaesthetic; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Counter-stimulation or distraction vs Conventional treatment

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

Pre-cooling of the injection site 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

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

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

Audiovisual distraction led to lower pre- and post-operative anxiety measures (Modified Child Dental… compared with conventional treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review