Search

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to present an evidence-based guideline for primary teeth with deep caries or trauma requiring vital pulp therapies (VPT). Methods: A systematic review/meta-analysis on vital primary teeth resulting from trauma or caries was conducted using GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for clinical recommendations. A decision tree was provided for choosing VPTs. Results: No articles on trauma VPT were found. For VPT in primary teeth with deep caries, indirect pulp treatment (IPT) or pulpotomy using the calcium silicate cement (mineral trioxide aggregate [MTA] or Biodentine ® ) show increased success over using direct pulp capping (DPC) and other pulpotomies. Different liners do not affect IPT success (high certainty) or DPC capping agents' success (very low certainty) after 24 months. It is strongly recommended, with high certainty from 24-month data, that calcium silicate cement pulpotomy is preferred over formocresol, ferric sulfate, zinc oxide eugenol pulpotomy, and other pulpotomies. Using selective caries removal and IPT for deep caries is strongly recommended with moderate certainty over complete and stepwise removal. Statistically, this results in significantly fewer pulp exposures. No caries removal and Hall technique crown may be used when indicated (moderate certainty at 24 months). For vital primary incisors with deep caries, pulpotomy was significantly better statistically than pulpectomy. Teeth diagnosed with/without reversible pulpitis pain showed comparable success after 12 months of treatment by IPT or calcium silicate cement pulpotomy. The following had little or no significant effect on MTA pulpotomy success: coronal pulp removal methods; irrigation solution; method to control hemorrhage; base over MTA; treatment in one or two visits; anterior or posterior teeth. Conclusions: Indirect pulp treatment or calcium silicate cement pulpotomy is likely to increase vital pulp therapy success over other VPTs such as direct pulp capping and other pulpotomies after 24 months (moderate certainty).

Purpose: to update the 2016 systematic review evidence for vital pulp therapy (VPT) for primary teeth affected by caries or trauma. Methods: The population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study (PICOS) design inclusion/exclusion was used for multiple databases. Risk of bias, meta-analyses using RevMan, and certainty of evidence was created. Results: A total of 299 studies were included; no trauma was found. Indirect pulp treatment (IPT) resulted in 97 percent success. Two calcium silicate cement (CSC) pulpotomies' success using mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine ® were 94 percent and 90 percent, respectively, greater than for direct pulp capping (DPC; 86 percent) and other pulpotomies (moderate certainty). The success of IPT versus pulpotomy at 24 months showed no significant difference (P=0.31). Different liners or capping agents did not affect the success of IPT (P=0.79) or DPC at 24 months (P=0.24). The two CSC pulpotomies were not significantly different based on 24-month success (P=0.34). The formocresol pulpotomy success at 24 months was significantly lower than for MTA (P=0.02). Ferric sulfate had a significant lower success at 24 months than MTA pulpotomy (69 percent versus 92 percent; P=0.03). Zinc oxide eugenol, as a singular pulpotomy, had low success (65 percent). Selective/stepwise caries removal did significantly better at avoiding pulp exposures than complete excavation (P<0.001). Complete, selective, and no caries removal (Hall technique [HT], steel crown placement with no caries removal) had no significant difference in pulp vitality success for deep caries at 24 months (P=0.29). For deep caries affecting vital incisors, pulpotomy had significantly greater success than pulpectomy (P=0.002). The following had no significant effect on MTA pulpotomy success: coronal pulp removal methods; irrigation solution; method to control hemorrhage; base over MTA; treatment in one or two visits; and anterior or posterior teeth. Conclusions: Vital pulp therapy success of indirect pulp treatment or two calcium silicate cement pulpotomies demonstrated improved success over direct pulp capping and other pulpotomies based on 24-month evidence with moderate certainty. The Hall technique did not significantly reduce pulp vitality success versus caries removal.

Purpose: To present evidence-based recommendations on nonpharmacological behavior guidance for the pediatric dental patient. Methods: The work group assessed eight systematic reviews for effectiveness of nonpharmacological behavior guidance techniques in children undergoing preventive care or a dental treatment visit. The key outcomes assessed included cooperative behavior, anxiety, and procedural pain. To formulate the recommendations, the work group used the GRADE framework to obtain consensus on domains such as priority of the problem, certainty of the evidence, balance between desirable and undesirable consequences, patients' values and preferences, acceptability, and feasibility. Results: Overall, the use of basic nonpharmacological behavior guidance techniques resulted in trivial-to-small effect on improvement in behavior or reduction in anxiety. However, for children and adolescents undergoing preventive care, mobile applications and modeling showed large effects in reduction of anxiety. For those undergoing dental treatment, strategies such as modeling, positive reinforcement, biofeedback relaxation, breathing relaxation, animal-assisted therapy, combined tell-show-do, audiovisual distraction, and cognitive behavior therapy showed large reduction in anxiety. For children and adolescents with special health care needs, audiovisual distraction and sensory-adapted dental environment showed large reduction of anxiety. Conclusions: All the formulated recommendations were conditional and were mostly based on very low certainty of evidence. Conditional recommendations imply that different choices or combinations of behavior guidance techniques may be most appropriate for different patients. Clinicians should use techniques consistent with the parent/patient values and preferences. These recommendations are based on the best available evidence to-date and are intended to aid clinical decision making.

'Purpose: To assess the effectiveness of nonpharmacological behavior guidance interventions used for children undergoing dental treatment visits., Methods: Databases: Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Embase, and Cochrane Library, were searched from 1946 to February 2022, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness of basic and advanced nonpharmacological techniques rendered during a dental treatment visit including sealants, restorative care, dental local anesthesia, and simple surgical procedures. The primary outcome measures were reduction in anxiety, fear, pain, and improvement in cooperative behavior. Eight authors determined the included RCTs, performed data extraction, and assessed the risk of bias (ROB). Standardized Mean Difference calculation and assignment of quality of evidence by Grading of Recommenda- tions Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach were done., Results: Forty articles qualified for analysis from 219 screened articles. Included studies evaluated the effectiveness of pre-visit preparation and in office strategies rendered pre-/post- or during treatment such as positive imagery, direct observation/modeling, desensitization, tell-show-do and its modifications, voice control, positive reinforcement, memory restructuring, bio- feedback and breathing relaxation, animal assisted therapy, combined therapies, and cognitive behavior therapy. The certainty of evidence ranged from Very low to high and the magnitude of effect varied from trivial to large change in the desired outcomes., Conclusions: Most of the basic non- pharmacological behavior guidance techniques showed trivial to small reduction in self-reported anxiety and/or improvement in behavior, with modeling, positive reinforcement, biofeedback relaxation, breathing relaxation, animal assisted therapy, combined tell-show-do and audiovisual distraction, and cognitive behavior therapy showing large effects in reduction of anxiety based on some scales.

Purpose: To assess the effectiveness of nonpharmacological behavior guidance interventions used for a child undergoing preventive dental visits., Methods: Databases: Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Embase, and Cochrane Library, were searched from 1946 to February 2022, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness of basic and advanced nonpharmacological techniques rendered during a pre- ventive visit including examination, prophylaxis, fluoride application and radiographs. Workgroup (WG) identified moderate-to-high quality system- atic reviews (SRs) published on hypnosis, audiovisual distraction, and parental presence/ absence; and decided to exclude these interventions from current SR to avoid duplication. The primary outcome measures for the studied interventions included reduction in anxiety, fear, pain, and improve- ment in cooperative behavior. Eight authors determined the included RCTs, performed data extraction, and assessed the risk of bias. Standardized Mean Difference calculation and assignment of quality of evidence by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach were done., Results: Fifteen articles qualified for analysis from 219 screened articles. WG found studies evaluating effectiveness of pre- visit preparation and in-office strategies rendered pre- or during treatment such as positive imagery, communication, modeling, tell-show-do, magic tricks, mobile applications, positive reinforcement, and sensory adapted dental environment. The certainty of evidence ranged from Very low to Moderate and the magnitude of effect varied from trivial to a large change in the desired outcomes., Conclusions: Most basic nonpharmacological behavior guidance techniques showed trivial to small reduction in self-reported anxiety and/or improvement in behavior, with mobile application and modeling showing large effects in reduction of anxiety based on some rating scales. Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO: CRD42022314723.

Purpose: To assess the effectiveness of nonpharmacological behavior guidance interventions used for children and youth with special health care needs (CYSHCN) during preventive and dental treatment visits., Methods: Databases: Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Embase, and Cochrane Library, were searched from 1946 to February 2022, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness of basic and advanced nonpharmacological techniques rendered during a preventive visit (exam, fluoride application, radiographs, and prophylaxis) or a treat- ment visit (simple surgical treatment, sealants, restorative care with or with local anesthesia) with control or other interventions. The primary outcome measures for the studied interventions were reduction in anxiety, fear, pain, and improvement in cooperative behavior. Eight authors determined the included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), performed data extraction, and assessed the risk of bias (ROB). Standardized Mean Difference calculation and assignment of quality of evidence by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach were done., Results: Eleven articles qualified for analysis from 219 screened articles. Included studies evaluate the effectiveness of in office strategies such as modeling, audio-visual distraction, sensory adapted dental environment, and picture exchange communication system. The certainty of evidence ranged from Very low to Low and the magnitude of effect varied from trivial to large change in the desired outcomes., Conclusions: Most basic non-pharmacological behavior guidance techniques showed some trivial to small reduction in self-reported anxiety and/ or improvement in behavior, with audiovisual distraction, Sensory Adapted Dental Environment, and Picture Exchange Communication System showing large reduction in anxiety based on some rating scales. Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO: CRD42022314723.