Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

91 questions · 95 findings · 24 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 19 · 20%GRADE not reported 40 · 42.1%Very low 27 · 28.4%Low 7 · 7.4%Moderate 2 · 2.1%High 0 · 0%

Chlorhexidine varnish (10% and 40%) vs placebo or no treatment

Caries increment in permanent teeth · Children and adolescents below 18 years at study start (included studies: children from birth to 15 years), with mixed, permanent or…

It is very uncertain whether chlorhexidine varnish (10% and 40%) changes caries increment in permanent dentition (DMFS; higher values… compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine varnish (10%) vs placebo or no treatment

Elevated mutans streptococci levels (>=4 with caries screen; high vs low) · Children and adolescents below 18 years at study start (included studies: children from birth to 15 years), with mixed, permanent or…

It is very uncertain whether chlorhexidine varnish (10%) changes elevated mutans streptococci levels (>=4 with caries screen; high vs… compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs No HVE

Reduction in contamination of aerosols on operator's face shield/mask (RCTs) · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

High-volume evacuation (HVE) showed no clear difference in reduction in contamination of aerosols on operator's face… compared with no HVE; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs Conventional dental suction (low-volume evacuator / saliva ejector)

Reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during ultrasonic scaling at 40 cm from mouth · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

It is very uncertain whether high-volume evacuation (HVE) changes reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during… compared with conventional dental suction (low-volume evacuator / saliva ejector) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs No HVE

Reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) at more than 1 foot from oral cavity (CCT) · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

High-volume evacuation (HVE) led to lower reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) at more than 1… compared with no HVE; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs No HVE

Reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) at less than 1 foot from oral cavity (CCTs) · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

High-volume evacuation (HVE) showed no clear difference in reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) at less than 1… compared with no HVE; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs No HVE

Reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during ultrasonic scaling and air polishing at more than 1 foot from oral cavity (RCT) · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

It is very uncertain whether high-volume evacuation (HVE) changes reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during… compared with no HVE (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs No HVE

Reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during ultrasonic scaling and air polishing at less than 1 foot (~30 cm) from oral cavity (RCTs) · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

It is very uncertain whether high-volume evacuation (HVE) changes reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during… compared with no HVE (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs Conventional dental suction (low-volume evacuator / saliva ejector)

Reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during ultrasonic scaling at 150 cm from mouth · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

It is very uncertain whether high-volume evacuation (HVE) changes reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during… compared with conventional dental suction (low-volume evacuator / saliva ejector) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Xylitol syrup (high dose, 8 g/day) vs Control (low-dose xylitol, 2.67 g/day) syrup

Adverse effects (loose stools, diarrhoea) · Infants (primary teeth; baseline about 9 to 15 months)
1 finding from 1 review

Mechanical (high-volume) irrigation vs Manual (low-volume) irrigation

Presence of dry socket · Adults with mandibular third molars requiring removal

It is very uncertain whether mechanical (high-volume) irrigation changes alveolar osteitis compared with manual (low-volume) irrigation (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Keratinocyte growth factor (KGF), higher dose/regimen vs Keratinocyte growth factor (KGF), different (lower) dose/regimen

Oral mucositis (any severity) · Adults with cancer receiving treatment
1 finding from 1 review

Higher total dose radiotherapy (76.8 Gy over 6.4 weeks) vs conventional dose RT

Total mortality · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Higher total dose radiotherapy (76.8 Gy over 6.4 weeks) showed no clear difference in total mortality compared with conventional/standard total dose radiotherapy (72 Gy); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher total dose radiotherapy (76.8 Gy over 6.4 weeks) vs conventional dose RT

Locoregional control · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Higher total dose radiotherapy (76.8 Gy over 6.4 weeks) showed no clear difference in locoregional control compared with conventional/standard total dose radiotherapy (72 Gy); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments)

Discomfort associated with the procedure · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… showed no clear difference in participant experience (discomfort during procedure) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments)

Pain (during procedure, primary dentition) · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… showed no clear difference in pain (during procedure, primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review