RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The overall pooled success rate of the Hall Technique (HT) in various types of studies has not been investigated. The present study aims to evaluate the success rate of HT to restore carious primary molars. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Scopus, Web of Science, and LIVIVO electronic databases, as well as the ProQuest database for grey literature review. A search was carried out up to September 2023 for studies meeting the eligibility criteria: Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs) and Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions (NRSIs); children with primary molars treated using HT; and reporting success for at least 1-month post-treatment. Single-arm meta-analysis assessed the pooled proportion (95% CI) of HT success rates. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach were assessed. RESULTS: Searching identified 665 studies, with 25 (15 RCTs and 10 NRSIs) meeting the eligibility criteria. In meta-analyses of RCTs, the pooled proportion success rate was 98% (95% CI: 97-99%) at 12-month follow-up. For NRSIs, the pooled proportion success rate was 95% (95% CI: 91-100%) up to 89 months. CONCLUSIONS: HT presents a high success rate, even though the primary studies had "low" to "high" risk of bias and demonstrated "moderate" to "low" certainty of evidence. One of the main reasons for downgrading was related to blinding, which was generally unfeasible due to visibly different restorative materials. The systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021204415).

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In dental extractions, particularly when local anesthesia is used, it usually offers analgesic relief for a few hours. However, pain can become a notable concern in the immediate postoperative period due to the trauma experienced by both soft and hard oral tissues. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the most effective strategies for managing postoperative pain in primary tooth extractions. METHODS: Two examiners conducted a search across five electronic databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and OpenGray. Studies were included if they met the following criteria after reviewing their titles and abstracts: they involved children and evaluated pain management following primary tooth extraction. Subsequently, articles that described extractions performed under any form of sedation, were not conducted under local anesthesia, in an outpatient setting, and in children aged 0 to 12 years, or were not randomized controlled trials, were excluded. RESULTS: The search yielded 374 relevant articles, of which 9 were included. Among these, 5 utilized preoperative medications as a pain management strategy, one evaluated low-level laser therapy (LLLT) postoperatively, one assessed calendula drops postoperatively, and another explored virtual reality during the procedure and arnica in solution both pre and postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Among all the strategies evaluated, the strategy involving analgesics administered 30 minutes before tooth extractions was supported by better-designed studies. However, there is a high risk of bias.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Dental Vulnerability Scale (EVO-BR) is an instrument developed to help identifying oral health-vulnerable individuals. This scale comprises 15 items distributed into 4 dimensions. It is the first instrument with the potential to guide clinical and managerial decisions in the oral health field. The aim is to validate a score to enable using EVO-BR in Primary Health Care (PHC). METHOD: The investigated sample included PHC users in five Brazilian regions. Data were collected at two different stages: in 2019 (São Paulo) and in 2022 (Minas Gerais, Mato Grosso, Roraima, Pernambuco e Paraná). Exploratory descriptive study of this scale scores was carried out to create classification ranges. Subsequently, discriminant analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of the established classification. Boosting regression was carried out to check items' weight for the instrument score. RESULTS: EVO-BR score ranged from 0 (highest vulnerability) to 15 (lowest vulnerability). Four (4) classification configurations were tested. Score equal to 12 points was the one presenting the best classification of the assessed individuals (100% were correctly classified). Boosting regression has evidenced that items 1 and 2 (Overall health domain) and 14 and 15 (Health Services domain) had the strongest influence on this instrument's score. CONCLUSION: The process to standardize the EVO-BR score and, consequently, to develop assessment ranges, is an important step in the fight against health inequalities, since it provides a tool to help planning actions and interventions aimed at meeting specific needs of the population in the Primary Health Care context.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Recently, trials have supported changes in deep caries management. However, reporting might lack details, affecting interpretation and implementation. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the adherence to the CONSORT statement and the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on deep caries management published in pediatric dental journals. METHODS: We searched PubMed for RCTs in six pediatric dental journals between 2010 and 2022, focusing on deep caries lesion management. Adherence to the CONSORT guideline and the risk of bias were assessed using a modified tool with 19 items; each scored from 0 to 2 (maximum of 38 points), and the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool. We performed descriptive and regression analyses (α = 5%). RESULTS: We analyzed 127 RCTs. The mean (standard deviation) CONSORT adherence score was 21.1 (6.7). Notably, 96.1% of the studies received a score of 2 for the "intervention" item, whereas 83.5% scored 0 for the "estimated effect size". The risk of bias assessment revealed that 40.2% of the RCTs were at high risk, 59% were at low risk, and 0.8% were at low risk. RCTs with a high risk of bias had lower CONSORT scores (p<0.001) than those with low or some concerns. RCTs published in journals without the endorsement of the CONSORT statement had lower scores than those in journals with the endorsement of the CONSORT statement. Older RCTs (6-10 years old and more than 10 years old) showed significantly lower CONSORT statement compliance than trials published recently within 5 years. CONCLUSION: Adherence to the CONSORT was relatively low among the investigated RCTs. Moreover, lower adherence to the CONSORT was associated with a higher risk of bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework - DOI ( 10.17605/OSF.IO/V6SYZ ).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Pediatric dentistry should rely on evidence-based clinical decisions supported by high-quality, unbiased systematic reviews (SRs). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the methodological quality and risk of bias of SRs focused on non- and micro-invasive treatment for caries lesions in primary and permanent teeth. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in multiple databases, including MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, and ProQuest, up to March 2023 to identify relevant systematic reviews (SRs) focused on non- and micro-invasive caries treatment. Two independent reviewers extracted data from the included SRs and assessed the methodological quality and risk of bias using the AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS tools, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 39 SRs were included in the analysis. Among these, 27 SRs (69.2%) were assessed as having critically low methodological quality, 11 SRs (28.2%) were considered to have low methodological quality, and only one SR was rated as high-quality. The primary concern identified was the absence of protocol registration before commencing of the study, observed in 33 SR when using the AMSTAR 2 tool. According to the ROBIS tool, 21 studies (53.8%) were categorized as low risk of bias, 10 (25.6%) as high risk, and eight (20.5%) as unclear risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Our analysis revealed that SRs focused on non- and micro-invasive treatment for caries in children and adolescents had critically low methodological quality according to the AMSTAR 2 tool but demonstrated a low risk of bias based on the ROBIS tool. These findings highlight the importance of emphasizing prospective protocol registration, transparent reporting of statistical analyses, and addressing potential bias implications within this topic. By addressing these issues, we can enhance the quality of SRs and ensure that clinical decisions rely on unbiased and trustworthy evidence.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate evidence of validity of internal structure of the Brazilian Dental Vulnerability Scale (EVO-BR) when applied in Brazil. METHODS: This is a psychometric study that seeks to validate a scale elaborated by evidence of internal structure. Data collection was conducted in 18 basic health units that implement the Brazilian Healthcare Planning (PAS) methodology, across the five regions of Brazil. The initial version of the EVO-BR contained 41 items that measured dental vulnerability and was applied to users of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) aged 18 years or older who were in basic health units for consultation with higher education professionals. To evaluate the evidence, the following statistical analyses were performed: exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and network analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1,753 users participated in the study. To adjust the sample, we considered the factorability obtained from Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test = 0.65, Bartlett sphericity test = 8019.7, and a matrix determinant of 0.008. The initial parallel analysis indicated a four-dimensional model and had the items adjusted according to factor loading (ranging from 0.38 to 0.99), common factors (0.13 to 0.89), and Pratt's measure, until the model presented congruence in the statistical and interpretative principles simultaneously. The final model contained 15 items, maintaining the four dimensions indicated by the parallel analysis, and held an explained variance of 68.56%. CONCLUSIONS: The EVO-BR is a validated scale to measure dental vulnerability and, thus, can contribute to the organization of access to the oral health team in primary health care (PHC) by stratifying the population, as recommended in the Brazilian Healthcare Planning.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Important evidence has been constantly produced and needs to be converted into practice. Professional consumption of such evidence may be a barrier to its implementation. Then, effective implementation of evidence-based interventions in clinical practice leans on the understanding of how professionals value attributes when choosing between options for dental care, permitting to guide this implementation process by maximizing strengthens and minimizing barriers related to that. METHODS: This is part of a broader project investigating the potential of incorporating scientific evidence into clinical practice and public policy recommendations and guidelines, identifying strengths and barriers in such an implementation process. The present research protocol comprises a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) from the Brazilian oral health professionals' perspective, aiming to assess how different factors are associated with professional decision-making in dental care, including the role of scientific evidence. Different choice sets will be developed, either focusing on understanding the role of scientific evidence in the professional decision-making process or on understanding specific attributes associated with different interventions recently tested in randomized clinical trials and available as newly produced scientific evidence to be used in clinical practice. DISCUSSION: Translating research into practice usually requires time and effort. Shortening this process may be useful for faster incorporation into clinical practice and beneficial to the population. Understanding the context and professionals' decision-making preferences is crucial to designing more effective implementation and/or educational initiatives. Ultimately, we expect to design an efficient implementation strategy that overcomes threats and potential opportunities identified during the DCEs, creating a customized structure for dental professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/bhncv .

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIMS: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis compiling data on the prevalence of bruxism in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Searches were carried out in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases to identify the articles published by February 2023. Two independent reviewers, and in duplicate, employed a two-stage process to select publications. The same two reviewers performed the data extraction. Studies were included when the following eligibility criteria were met: performed in children and/or adolescents with cerebral palsy and reporting bruxism. Potentially eligible studies were read in full and excluded that: not presented numerical data on the prevalence of bruxism; not reported how the bruxism was assessed; not reported data about the cerebral palsy; and not an observational study. The risk assessment of bias was assessed by the Newcastle- Ottawa Scale. After reading the titles and abstracts of the 358 identified articles, eight articles from 1966 to 2020 were included. The main reason for not including the studies was not to report data about bruxism (59.3%), and 44.5% were excluded for not reporting data from patients with cerebral palsy. The studies were carried out in schools, university hospitals, or centers for patients with special needs (Brazil, the United States, and Egypt). The pooled prevalence of bruxism in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy was 46% (95%CI: 0.38-0.55) after removing one study. CONCLUSION: The pooled prevalence of bruxism in children with cerebral palsy can be considered high since almost half of the studied population is affected by this condition. PROSPERO #CRD42021225781.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) enhance health care and aid clinicians' decisions. AIM: To evaluate the quality of clinical guidelines in paediatric dentistry using the AGREE II tool. DESIGN: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LIVIVO, Lilacs, international guidelines websites, scientific societies, and gray literature were searched until September 2021. We included paediatric dental clinical guidelines and excluded drafts or guidelines for patients with special needs. Two independent reviewers performed quality assessment using the APPRAISAL OF GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH & EVALUATION II (AGREE II) instrument. We calculated the mean overall domain scores (95% confidence interval) for each guideline. We used regression analysis to correlate the score of overall assessment and the six domains of AGREE II with guideline characteristics. RESULTS: Forty-four guidelines were included in this study. Highest mean score was for Domain 4 (Clarity of Presentation; 58%, 95% CI: 50.8-64.9), whereas the lowest was for Domain 5 (Applicability; 16%, 95% CI: 10.8-21.4). The reporting quality was improved in Domains 1-5 with reporting checklists (p < .001), whereas that of Domain 6 was improved by decreasing years since publication (p = .047). CONCLUSION: Paediatric dental guidelines do not comply with the methodological quality standard, especially in Domain 5 (Applicability). The AGREE reporting checklist should be implemented with a system to evaluate the certainty of evidence for future guidelines.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Hall technique (HT) has been indicated for teeth with dentinal caries lesion; however, extensive cavities, with more than two surfaces still seem challenging for restorative treatment in pediatric dentistry, resulting in a higher failure rate and an increased need for retreatment. OBJECTIVES: To compare the survival rate of the Hall technique preformed metal crown (HT) with resin composite restoration (RC) for multi-surface cavitated caries lesions in primary molars. METHODOLOGY: In this multicenter two-arm randomized clinical trial, children between 4 and 9 years of age with at least one primary molar with cavitated caries lesion involving more than two surfaces, including one buccal or palatal/lingual surface, were selected from 17 Brazilian cities. A total of 364 teeth were allocated into two groups: (1) teeth treated with selective caries removal and RC and (2) treated with the HT. The survival rate was assessed at 6 and 12 months after the interventions. Survival analysis was performed with the Kaplan‒Meier method. Cox regression was used to determine the influence of explanatory variables on the survival rate (α=5%). RESULTS: After 12 months, 292 teeth were re-evaluated. A total of 358 teeth were re-evaluated at least once during the study and included in the survival analysis. The HT (87.8%) resulted in a higher survival rate than RC restoration (75.7%) (p=0.004). CONCLUSION: HT has a higher survival rate than RC as a treatment for multi-surface cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02782390.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this systematic study was to investigate the effectiveness of selective, stepwise, and non-selective removal techniques for caries removal in permanent teeth with deep carious lesions. The primary focus was the results found comparing techniques for caries removal to check whether there was pulp exposition; the secondary was the materials used for pulp protection and clinical findings reported within the included studies. METHODS: The search was performed in two databases (PubMed/MEDLINE and Web Of Science). The studies included in this systematic review were selected based on eligibility criteria. The inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), (2) that compared the total removal of carious tissue with selective removal in permanent teeth with deep carious lesions, (3) with a follow-up period of at least 6 months, and (4) publications in English. Regarding the exclusion criteria, the following were not considered: (1) articles published in other languages, (2) articles that did not compare the different types of total/selective decay removal, and (3) articles published before January 2008. The risk of bias and the quality of the included studies were independently assessed by two reviewers using the RoB 2 tool. RESULTS: 5 out of 105 potentially eligible studies were included. Regarding the teeth included in the study, three articles performed management only on permanent molars, while other studies also performed management on incisors/canines/premolars/molars. Management protocols were divided into nonselective caries removal and partial caries removal (selective/stepwise). The theory of non-selective caries removal was considered an excessive, unnecessarily invasive option and a form of outdated management, and selective removal was preferred. CONCLUSION: The selective removal technique presented a higher success rate and fewer incidences of pulpal exposure than total removal, after up to 18 months of follow up. Moreover, only one session seemed to be a better management choice compared to two sessions because the cavity re-opening procedure is more prone to pulp exposure and highly depends on patient commitment. Otherwise, at 5 years of follow up, there was no difference between selective removal and total removal in management longevity. In addition, there were also no differences between the success of the materials used for definitive restorations in teeth subjected to any of the techniques evaluated.

RESUMEN

This meta-research aimed to provide an overview of the methodological quality and risk of bias of network meta-analyses (NMA) in dentistry. Searches for NMA of randomized clinical trials with clinical outcomes in dentistry were performed in databases up to January 2022. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts, selected full texts, and extracted the data. The adherence to PRISMA-NMA reporting guideline, the AMSTAR-2 methodological quality tool, and the ROBIS risk of bias tool were assessed in the studies. Correlation between the PRISMA-NMA adherence and the AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS results was also investigated. Sixty-two NMA studies were included and presented varied methodological quality. According to AMSTAR-2, half of the NMA presented moderate quality (n = 32; 51.6%). The adherence to PRISMA-NMA also varied. Only 36 studies (58.1%) prospectively registered the protocol. Other issues lacking of reporting were data related were data related to the NMA geometry and the assessment of results consistency, and the evaluation of risk of bias across the studies. ROBIS assessment showed a high risk of bias mainly for domains 1 (study eligibility criteria) and 2 (identification and selection of studies). Correlation coefficients between the PRISMA-NMA adherence and the AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS results showed moderate correlation (rho < 0.6). Overall, NMA studies in dentistry were of moderate quality and at high risk of bias in several domains, especially study selection. Future reviews should be better planned and conducted and have higher compliance with reporting and quality assessment tools.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There is currently a lack of evidence supporting the use of valid surrogates in caries clinical trials. This study aimed at examining the validity of two surrogate outcomes used in randomized clinical trials for caries prevention, pit and fissure sealants and fluoridated dentifrices, according to the Prentice criteria. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), LILACS and Scopus databases up to 05 October 2022. The grey literature and the list of eligible studies' references were also screened. The search was conducted, selecting randomized clinical trials focussed on dental caries prevention using pit and fissure sealants or fluoridated dentifrices and with at least one surrogate endpoint for cavitated caries lesions. The risk of each surrogate endpoint and for the occurrence of cavitated caries lesions was calculated and compared. The association between each surrogate and the presence of cavitation was quantified, and each outcome was assessed graphically for validity according to the Prentice criteria. RESULTS: For pit and fissure sealants, from 1696 potentially eligible studies, 51 were included; while for fluoridated dentifrices, of 3887 potentially eligible studies, four were included. Possible surrogates assessed were retention of sealants, presence of white spot lesions, presence of plaque or marginal discoloration around the sealants, oral hygiene index, radiographic and fluorescence caries lesion assessments. However, only the retention of sealants and the presence of white spot lesions could be evaluated for their validity according to the Prentice criteria. CONCLUSION: Loss of retention of sealants and the presence of white spot lesions do not fulfil all of the Prentice criteria. Therefore, they cannot be considered valid surrogates for caries prevention.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Purpose: The current study aims to evaluate bite force, perception of orofacial pain, and treatment satisfaction of patients with bruxism using two protocols of botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) injections. Material and Methods: Two groups of patients seeking bruxism treatment and presenting bilateral orofacial pain of muscle origin were randomly created according to BTX-A injection sites: masseter muscle only, bilaterally (3 points in each muscle, 10 U per point), and masseter and temporal muscles (3 points in each masseter muscle and 2 points in each temporal muscle, 10 U per point). The patients were evaluated preoperatively and longitudinally at 15, 90, 120, and 180 days by the use of visual analog scales for pain and treatment satisfaction and a gnathodynamometer for bite force recording. Results: The final sample included 10 participants in each group. Both groups presented mitigation of pain at 15, 90, 120, and 180 days in comparison with baseline; however, reduction in the posterior bite force was noted only at 15, 90, and 120 days. Quite high treatment satisfaction was reported from both groups at 15, 90, 120, and 180 days. No differences were observed between the groups in all evaluations and study periods. Conclusion: In general, considering pain relief, reduction in bite force, and treatment satisfaction, both protocols of BTX-A seem to be somewhat equally effective in the short-term management (up to 120 days) of bruxism.

RESUMEN

Data on clinical management options for sleep bruxism in the primary dentition are inconclusive. This umbrella review aimed to synthesize the available evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) on the associated factors and treatment approaches for clinical management of sleep bruxism in children. A search was conducted in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and OpenGrey databases up to March 2022. SRs published on sleep bruxism in children containing data on associated factors or treatment outcomes were included. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of SRs. The search identified 444 articles, of which six were included. Sleep conditions, respiratory changes, personality traits, and psychosocial factors were the associated factors commonly identified. Treatments included psychological and pharmacological therapies, occlusal devices, physical therapy, and surgical therapy. All SRs included presented a high risk of bias. Overlapping of the included studies was considered very high. The best evidence available to date for the management of sleep bruxism in children is based on associated factors, with sleep duration and conditions, respiratory changes, as well as personality traits and psychosocial factors being the most important factors commonly reported by studies. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to make recommendations for specific treatment options.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Selective outcome reporting (SOR) is a bias that occurs when the primary outcome of a randomised clinical trial (RCT) is omitted or changed. AIM: To evaluate the prevalence of SOR in RCTs on restorative treatment in primary teeth. DESIGN: We conducted an electronic search on ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization platform (International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) on 1st of April 2021, with no registry time or language restrictions. We included RCT protocols that evaluated restorative treatments in primary teeth and excluded trials that did not have a complete publication in a scientific journal. The chi-squared test was used to identify the association between SOR and variables as a discrepancy in the follow-up period, the timing of registration, the type of sponsorship and the type of study design (α = 5%). RESULTS: Of the 294 identified protocols, 30 were included in the study. 83.3% of trials were registered retrospectively. SOR was observed in 53.3% (n = 16) of the published trials and was significantly associated with a discrepancy in the follow-up period (p = .017). CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of SOR in RCTs on restorative treatment proves that this is a prominent threat. A proper preregistered protocol, declaration of any protocol deviation and allowance of stakeholders to compare the protocol with that of the submitted papers will achieve transparency.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate evidence of validity of internal structure of the Brazilian Dental Vulnerability Scale (EVO-BR) when applied in Brazil. METHODS This is a psychometric study that seeks to validate a scale elaborated by evidence of internal structure. Data collection was conducted in 18 basic health units that implement the Brazilian Healthcare Planning (PAS) methodology, across the five regions of Brazil. The initial version of the EVO-BR contained 41 items that measured dental vulnerability and was applied to users of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) aged 18 years or older who were in basic health units for consultation with higher education professionals. To evaluate the evidence, the following statistical analyses were performed: exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and network analysis. RESULTS A total of 1,753 users participated in the study. To adjust the sample, we considered the factorability obtained from Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test = 0.65, Bartlett sphericity test = 8019.7, and a matrix determinant of 0.008. The initial parallel analysis indicated a four-dimensional model and had the items adjusted according to factor loading (ranging from 0.38 to 0.99), common factors (0.13 to 0.89), and Pratt's measure, until the model presented congruence in the statistical and interpretative principles simultaneously. The final model contained 15 items, maintaining the four dimensions indicated by the parallel analysis, and held an explained variance of 68.56%. CONCLUSIONS The EVO-BR is a validated scale to measure dental vulnerability and, thus, can contribute to the organization of access to the oral health team in primary health care (PHC) by stratifying the population, as recommended in the Brazilian Healthcare Planning.

RESUMO OBJETIVO Avaliar evidências de validade da estrutura interna da Escala Brasileira de Vulnerabilidade Odontológica (EVO-BR) quando aplicada no Brasil. MÉTODOS Trata-se de um estudo de natureza psicométrica, que busca validar uma escala elaborada por meio de evidências de estrutura interna. A coleta de dados foi realizada em 18 unidades básicas de saúde que executam a metodologia da Planificação da Atenção à Saúde (PAS), distribuídas nas cinco regiões do Brasil. A versão inicial da EVO-BR continha 41 itens que mediam vulnerabilidade odontológica e foram aplicadas em usuários com 18 anos ou mais, usuários do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), que estivessem nas unidades básicas de saúde para consulta com profissionais de nível superior. Para avaliação das evidências, foram utilizadas as seguintes análises estatísticas: análise fatorial exploratória, análise fatorial confirmatória e network analysis. RESULTADOS Participaram do estudo 1.753 usuários. Para adequação da amostra, considerou-se a fatorabilidade obtida de Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) = 0,65, Bartlett sphericity = 8019,7 e determinante da matriz de 0,008. A análise paralela inicial indicou um modelo de quatro dimensões e teve os itens ajustados conforme cargas fatorais (variaram de 0,38 a 0,99), comunalidades (0,13 a 0,89) e Pratt's measure, até que o modelo tivesse congruência nos princípios estatístico e interpretativo simultaneamente. O modelo final apresentou 15 itens, manteve a indicação de quatro dimensões pela análise paralela e uma variância explicada de 68,56%. CONCLUSÕES A EVO-BR é uma escala validada para mensurar vulnerabilidade odontológica e, dessa forma, pode contribuir para organização do acesso a equipe de saúde bucal na atenção primária à saúde (APS) por meio da estratificação da população, como recomendado na planificação.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Abstract Background Hall technique (HT) has been indicated for teeth with dentinal caries lesion; however, extensive cavities, with more than two surfaces still seem challenging for restorative treatment in pediatric dentistry, resulting in a higher failure rate and an increased need for retreatment. Objectives To compare the survival rate of the Hall technique preformed metal crown (HT) with resin composite restoration (RC) for multi-surface cavitated caries lesions in primary molars. Methodology In this multicenter two-arm randomized clinical trial, children between 4 and 9 years of age with at least one primary molar with cavitated caries lesion involving more than two surfaces, including one buccal or palatal/lingual surface, were selected from 17 Brazilian cities. A total of 364 teeth were allocated into two groups: (1) teeth treated with selective caries removal and RC and (2) treated with the HT. The survival rate was assessed at 6 and 12 months after the interventions. Survival analysis was performed with the Kaplan‒Meier method. Cox regression was used to determine the influence of explanatory variables on the survival rate (α=5%). Results After 12 months, 292 teeth were re-evaluated. A total of 358 teeth were re-evaluated at least once during the study and included in the survival analysis. The HT (87.8%) resulted in a higher survival rate than RC restoration (75.7%) (p=0.004). Conclusion HT has a higher survival rate than RC as a treatment for multi-surface cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02782390

RESUMEN

Abstract This meta-research aimed to provide an overview of the methodological quality and risk of bias of network meta-analyses (NMA) in dentistry. Searches for NMA of randomized clinical trials with clinical outcomes in dentistry were performed in databases up to January 2022. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts, selected full texts, and extracted the data. The adherence to PRISMA-NMA reporting guideline, the AMSTAR-2 methodological quality tool, and the ROBIS risk of bias tool were assessed in the studies. Correlation between the PRISMA-NMA adherence and the AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS results was also investigated. Sixty-two NMA studies were included and presented varied methodological quality. According to AMSTAR-2, half of the NMA presented moderate quality (n = 32; 51.6%). The adherence to PRISMA-NMA also varied. Only 36 studies (58.1%) prospectively registered the protocol. Other issues lacking of reporting were data related were data related to the NMA geometry and the assessment of results consistency, and the evaluation of risk of bias across the studies. ROBIS assessment showed a high risk of bias mainly for domains 1 (study eligibility criteria) and 2 (identification and selection of studies). Correlation coefficients between the PRISMA-NMA adherence and the AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS results showed moderate correlation (rho < 0.6). Overall, NMA studies in dentistry were of moderate quality and at high risk of bias in several domains, especially study selection. Future reviews should be better planned and conducted and have higher compliance with reporting and quality assessment tools.

RESUMEN

Abstract Data on clinical management options for sleep bruxism in the primary dentition are inconclusive. This umbrella review aimed to synthesize the available evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) on the associated factors and treatment approaches for clinical management of sleep bruxism in children. A search was conducted in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and OpenGrey databases up to March 2022. SRs published on sleep bruxism in children containing data on associated factors or treatment outcomes were included. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of SRs. The search identified 444 articles, of which six were included. Sleep conditions, respiratory changes, personality traits, and psychosocial factors were the associated factors commonly identified. Treatments included psychological and pharmacological therapies, occlusal devices, physical therapy, and surgical therapy. All SRs included presented a high risk of bias. Overlapping of the included studies was considered very high. The best evidence available to date for the management of sleep bruxism in children is based on associated factors, with sleep duration and conditions, respiratory changes, as well as personality traits and psychosocial factors being the most important factors commonly reported by studies. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to make recommendations for specific treatment options.