Can a behaviour change toothbrushing intervention prevent dental caries in 11–13-year-olds?

Q3 Dentistry
Darshini Ramasubbu, Jonathan Lewney
{"title":"Can a behaviour change toothbrushing intervention prevent dental caries in 11–13-year-olds?","authors":"Darshini Ramasubbu, Jonathan Lewney","doi":"10.1038/s41432-024-01066-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Design</h3><p>The Brushing RemInder 4 Good oral HealTh (BRIGHT) multi-centre randomized controlled trial was based in state-funded secondary schools in England, Wales and Scotland. It had two arms, aiming to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of a 50 min education session and twice daily brush reminder text messages on toothbrushing and caries rates, compared to the normal education curriculum and no SMS. Outcomes were assessed at intervals over 2.5 years and were assessor-blinded.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Case selection</h3><p>Pupils aged 11-13 were recruited from participating schools, and in each school randomised via year group to either the intervention or control group following baseline assessments by calibrated dental professionals. Exclusion criteria included not having a functioning mobile phone.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Data analysis</h3><p>The primary outcome, D<sub>4–6</sub> MFT (Decayed, Missing and Filled Teeth), was analysed using mixed-effect logistic regression and sensitivity analyses were conducted. A cost-utility analysis was also undertaken.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>In total 42 schools, containing 84 year groups were randomised, and 4680 pupils were in the final sample. 663 pupils withdrew from follow up. At 6 months, there was evidence that intervention group pupils were more likely to report brushing at least twice per day However, by 2.5 years this effect was no longer evident. 2383 participants had a valid dental assessment at both baseline and 2.5 years, with 514 children in the intervention and 529 children in the control group presenting with obvious decay experience in at least one permanent tooth after 2.5 years. The intervention was estimated to have a 7% chance of being cost-effective. Over the 2.5-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in QALYs and costs between groups.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>The findings from the BRIGHT trial indicate no evidence of a statistically significant difference between the intervention and control groups for the prevalence of caries after 2.5-years. The behaviour change intervention did not translate into a reduction in caries rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":12234,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based dentistry","volume":"208 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-024-01066-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Design

The Brushing RemInder 4 Good oral HealTh (BRIGHT) multi-centre randomized controlled trial was based in state-funded secondary schools in England, Wales and Scotland. It had two arms, aiming to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of a 50 min education session and twice daily brush reminder text messages on toothbrushing and caries rates, compared to the normal education curriculum and no SMS. Outcomes were assessed at intervals over 2.5 years and were assessor-blinded.

Case selection

Pupils aged 11-13 were recruited from participating schools, and in each school randomised via year group to either the intervention or control group following baseline assessments by calibrated dental professionals. Exclusion criteria included not having a functioning mobile phone.

Data analysis

The primary outcome, D4–6 MFT (Decayed, Missing and Filled Teeth), was analysed using mixed-effect logistic regression and sensitivity analyses were conducted. A cost-utility analysis was also undertaken.

Results

In total 42 schools, containing 84 year groups were randomised, and 4680 pupils were in the final sample. 663 pupils withdrew from follow up. At 6 months, there was evidence that intervention group pupils were more likely to report brushing at least twice per day However, by 2.5 years this effect was no longer evident. 2383 participants had a valid dental assessment at both baseline and 2.5 years, with 514 children in the intervention and 529 children in the control group presenting with obvious decay experience in at least one permanent tooth after 2.5 years. The intervention was estimated to have a 7% chance of being cost-effective. Over the 2.5-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in QALYs and costs between groups.

Conclusions

The findings from the BRIGHT trial indicate no evidence of a statistically significant difference between the intervention and control groups for the prevalence of caries after 2.5-years. The behaviour change intervention did not translate into a reduction in caries rates.

改变刷牙行为的干预措施能预防 11-13 岁儿童的龋齿吗?
设计 "刷牙提醒促进口腔健康"(BRIGHT)多中心随机对照试验在英格兰、威尔士和苏格兰的公立中学进行。试验分为两部分,旨在评估 50 分钟的教育课程和每天两次的刷牙提醒短信对刷牙率和龋齿率的临床和成本效益,与正常教育课程和无短信相比。病例选择从参与学校中招募 11-13 岁的学生,由经过校准的牙科专业人员进行基线评估后,按年级组随机分配到干预组或对照组。数据分析采用混合效应逻辑回归法对主要结果 D4-6 MFT(蛀牙、缺失牙和填充牙)进行分析,并进行了敏感性分析。结果共有 42 所学校、84 个年级组接受了随机抽样,最终样本中有 4680 名学生。663 名学生退出了跟踪调查。6 个月时,有证据表明干预组的学生更有可能表示每天至少刷牙两次。2383 名参与者在基线和 2.5 年时接受了有效的牙科评估,其中干预组和对照组分别有 514 名和 529 名儿童在 2.5 年后至少有一颗恒牙出现明显蛀牙。据估计,干预措施具有 7% 的成本效益。结论 BRIGHT 试验的结果表明,没有证据表明干预组和对照组在 2.5 年后的龋齿患病率上存在显著的统计学差异。行为改变干预并没有降低龋齿率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evidence-based dentistry
Evidence-based dentistry Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Evidence-Based Dentistry delivers the best available evidence on the latest developments in oral health. We evaluate the evidence and provide guidance concerning the value of the author''s conclusions. We keep dentistry up to date with new approaches, exploring a wide range of the latest developments through an accessible expert commentary. Original papers and relevant publications are condensed into digestible summaries, drawing attention to the current methods and findings. We are a central resource for the most cutting edge and relevant issues concerning the evidence-based approach in dentistry today. Evidence-Based Dentistry is published by Springer Nature on behalf of the British Dental Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信