Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,227 questions · 2,562 findings · 156 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 297 · 11.6%GRADE not reported 1,616 · 63.1%Very low 405 · 15.8%Low 144 · 5.6%Moderate 81 · 3.2%High 19 · 0.7%

Oral hygiene training (toothbrushing routine) of people with ID vs No oral hygiene training of people with ID

Plaque · Children and adults with mild to profound ID; setting residential or school

It is very uncertain whether oral hygiene training (toothbrushing routine) of people with ID changes plaque (short term) compared with no oral hygiene training of people with ID (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral hygiene training (toothbrushing routine) of people with ID vs No oral hygiene training of people with ID

Behaviour, attitude and self-efficacy (toothbrushing behaviour) (medium and long term) · Children and adults with mild to profound ID; setting residential or school
1 finding from 1 review
  • Oral hygiene interventions for people with intellectual disabilities 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Long term (>12 months)
    Behaviour, attitude and self-efficacy (steps achieved in a toothbrushing routine), 100 days to 19 months; 59 participants (4 NRS); Very Low. Results not in a format for meta-analysis: 3 NRS (56 participants) reported…
    4 studies · 59 participants
    Very low

Oral hygiene training (toothbrushing routine) of people with ID vs No oral hygiene training of people with ID

Gingivitis · Children and adults with mild to profound ID; setting residential or school

It is very uncertain whether oral hygiene training (toothbrushing routine) of people with ID changes gingival inflammation (short term) compared with no oral hygiene training of people with ID (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Any antifungal intervention for the treatment of oral candidiasis vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Length of hospital stay · Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with overt oral candidiasis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Any antifungal intervention for the treatment of oral candidiasis vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Amount of analgesia · Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with overt oral candidiasis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Any antifungal intervention for the treatment of oral candidiasis vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Incidence of systemic infection · Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with overt oral candidiasis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Any antifungal intervention for the treatment of oral candidiasis vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Relief of dysphagia · Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with overt oral candidiasis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Any antifungal intervention for the treatment of oral candidiasis vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Relief of pain · Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with overt oral candidiasis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Any antifungal intervention for the treatment of oral candidiasis vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Patient quality of life · Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with overt oral candidiasis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Individualised oral care plan based on a multidisciplinary assessment vs usual care

Plaque · Adults aged 22 to 57 years with mixed levels of ID; setting residential
1 finding from 1 review
  • Oral hygiene interventions for people with intellectual disabilities 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Medium term (6 weeks to 12 months)
    Individualised oral care plan vs usual care. Subjective Oral Hygiene Rating scale 1-5 and Improvement Differential, mean 12 months; SOHR 2.97 (intervention) vs 3.10 (control); improvement differential 38% vs 5%; 79…
    1 study · 79 participants
    Very low

Light-based detection and/or oral spectroscopy (e.g. ViziLite, VELscope, Microlux DL, Identafi 3000) vs Surgical or punch biopsy with histological assessment

Specificity · Adults (aged 16 years or over) presenting to primary or secondary care with clinically evident suspicious or innocuous oral lesions
1 finding from 1 review

Light-based detection and/or oral spectroscopy (e.g. ViziLite, VELscope, Microlux DL, Identafi 3000) vs Surgical or punch biopsy with histological assessment

Sensitivity · Adults (aged 16 years or over) presenting to primary or secondary care with clinically evident suspicious or innocuous oral lesions
1 finding from 1 review

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

Number of days of treatment with opioid analgesics · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

Quality of life · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment
2 findings from 1 review

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

Adverse events · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment
2 findings from 1 review

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

Number of days in hospital (duration of hospitalisation) · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

Interruptions to cancer treatment (incidence) · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

Normalcy of diet (total parenteral nutrition) · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment

It is very uncertain whether oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed… changes normalcy of diet (days of total parenteral nutrition, TPN) compared with control (no treatment or standard/usual oral care, e.g. saline rinse) (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

Duration of interruptions to cancer treatment · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment

It is very uncertain whether oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed… changes duration of interruptions to cancer treatment compared with control (no treatment or standard/usual oral care, e.g. saline rinse) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Theory-based oral health education/promotion interventions (HBM, TPB, SCT, HAPA, TTM, PMT, SOC, PRECEDE-PROCEED, MI) vs Control (waitlist, routine/standard oral health education, or minimal intervention)

Mean DMFT (decayed, missing, filled permanent teeth) · school‐age children and adolescents

Theory-based interventions showed no significant effect on DMFT scores (SMD -0.11; low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review