Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

198 questions · 215 findings · 12 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 17 · 7.9%GRADE not reported 191 · 88.8%Very low 7 · 3.3%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Open TMJ surgery (arthroplasty / total joint replacement)

Outcome not reported · Adults (>18 years) with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ OA) diagnosed by RDC/TMD or compatible criteria

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Composite resin vs Amalgam restoration

Restoration failure · Permanent posterior teeth (molars/premolars) receiving direct restoration

There was no statistically significant difference in failure risk between composite resin and amalgam restorations in permanent posterior teeth (pooled RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.34; 13 studies; not GRADE-rated, with very high heterogeneity, I2 = 97%).

1 finding from 1 review

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Bar attachment system

Re-treatment: replacement of attachment system (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)

It is very uncertain whether ball (stud) attachment system changes re-treatment: replacement of attachment system (short term) compared with bar attachment system (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Need for retreatment or replacement of fixation due to failure of the fixation · Adults (>16 years old) undergoing orthognathic surgery
1 finding from 1 review
  • Resorbable versus titanium plates for orthognathic surgery 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Mean 1 year
    SoF row (Resorbable plates compared to titanium plates for stabilization after orthognathic surgery). Need for retreatment or replacement of fixation due to failure of the fixation (plates failed or removed in each…
    1 study · 60 participants
    Very low

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

Need for retreatment or replacement of fixation due to failure of the fixation · Adults over 18 years of age with fractures of the facial skeleton including the mandible, maxilla, zygoma (malar); studies on fractures of…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Resorbable versus titanium plates for facial fractures 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 years postoperatively
    Planned primary outcome not assessed: none of the retrieved studies met the inclusion criteria, so no data were available for analysis. Verbatim (Effects of interventions): "Although 53 studies were retrieved in our…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer) vs Amalgam restoration

Replacement (failure) of Class II restoration at 12 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free

Resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer) showed no clear difference in replacement (failure) of Class II restoration at 12 months compared with amalgam; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)

Presence of clinical symptoms (pain, swelling, diagnosis of pulpitis, abscess formation) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam)

Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)

Success or failure of restoration (as defined by the USPHS criteria) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)

Adverse events · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam)

Perioperative or postoperative pain or discomfort · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)

Further restoration required (repair, restoration, placement of crown/inlay, root filling) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam)

Success or failure of restoration (as defined by the USPHS criteria) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam)

Extraction of tooth (due to decay) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam)

Adverse events · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)

Perioperative or postoperative pain or discomfort · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)

Extraction of tooth (due to decay) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam)

Presence of clinical symptoms (pain, swelling, diagnosis of pulpitis, abscess formation) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam)

Further restoration required (repair, restoration, placement of crown/inlay, root filling) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)

Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review