RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Fluoride varnish (FV) is widely recommended for caries prevention in preschool children, despite its anticaries benefits being uncertain and modest. Dentists often report using clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) as a source of scientific information. AIM: To identify and analyze recommendations for clinical practice on the use of FV for caries prevention in preschool children and to assess the methodological quality of the CPG on this topic. DESIGN: Two researchers independently used 12 search strategies and searched the first five pages of Google Search™ and three guideline databases for recommendations freely available to health professionals on the use of FV for caries prevention in preschoolers. Then, they retrieved and recorded recommendations that met the eligibility criteria and extracted the data. A third researcher resolved disagreements. Each included CPG was appraised using the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: Twenty-nine documents were included. Recommendations varied according to age, patients' caries risk, and application frequency. Of the six CPGs, only one scored above 70% in the AGREE II overall assessment. CONCLUSION: Recommendations on the use of FV lacked scientific evidence, and CPGs were of poor quality. Application of FV is widely recommended despite recent evidence showing an uncertain, modest, and possibly not clinically relevant anticaries benefit. Dentists should be aware that it is necessary to critically appraise CPGs since they may be of poor quality.
Asunto(s)
Caries Dental , Fluoruros , Humanos , Preescolar , Fluoruros Tópicos/uso terapéutico , Cariostáticos/uso terapéutico , Susceptibilidad a Caries Dentarias , Caries Dental/prevención & control , Caries Dental/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of fluoride varnish (FV) in reducing dentine caries at the patient, tooth, and surface levels as well as caries-related hospitalizations in preschoolers. We performed a systematic review of clinical trials of FV, alone or associated with an oral health program, compared with placebo, usual care, or no intervention. Bibliographical search included electronic searches of seven databases, registers of ongoing trials, and meeting abstracts, as well as hand searching. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and calculated confidence and prediction intervals. The search yielded 2,441 records; 20 trials were included in the review and 17 in at least one meta-analysis. Only one study had low risk of bias in all domains. We found no study reporting on caries-related hospitalizations. At the individual level, the pooled relative risk was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81, 0.95); this means that in a population of preschool children with 50% caries incidence, we need to apply fluoride varnish in 17 children to avoid new caries in one child. At the tooth level, the pooled weighted mean difference was -0.30 (95% CI -0.69, 0.09) and at the surface level -0.77 (95% CI -1.23, -0.31). Considering the prediction intervals, none of the pooled estimates were statistically significant. We conclude that FV showed a modest and uncertain anticaries effect in preschoolers. Cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to assess whether FV should be adopted or abandoned by dental services.