Are mobile health applications for traumatic dental injuries effective? A systematic review of their impact on diagnosis, prevention, management, and education.
T Walia, M S Muthu, A Saikia, R M Shetty, R P Anthonappa
{"title":"Are mobile health applications for traumatic dental injuries effective? A systematic review of their impact on diagnosis, prevention, management, and education.","authors":"T Walia, M S Muthu, A Saikia, R M Shetty, R P Anthonappa","doi":"10.1007/s40368-025-01071-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps) have emerged as powerful tools for enhancing clinical decision-making, knowledge dissemination, and proactive care in traumatic dental injuries (TDIs). This systematic review aims to collate and assess the available evidence on the usefulness of mobile apps in (1) diagnosis, (2) prevention, (3) management, and (4) education of TDIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review examined studies published between January 2012 and August 2024, focusing on randomised controlled trials (RCTs), clinical trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies that assessed the effectiveness of mobile health apps in the management of TDI care. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 for RCTs and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies. The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including 12 cross-sectional studies and 4 RCTs. The cross-sectional studies primarily assessed knowledge improvement, while the RCTs focused on skill development and practical applications. Quality assessments indicated notable methodological concerns. All four RCTs were rated as high risk of bias due to inadequate randomisation, lack of blinding, and participant attrition. According to the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of the evidence was judged to be very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While mobile health applications such as ToothSOS, Dental Trauma, and Injured Tooth show promise in improving knowledge and decision-making related to TDIs, the evidence is limited by high risk of bias and low quality. Future studies should focus on rigorous RCTs and explore AI integration to enhance effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":520615,"journal":{"name":"European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-025-01071-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps) have emerged as powerful tools for enhancing clinical decision-making, knowledge dissemination, and proactive care in traumatic dental injuries (TDIs). This systematic review aims to collate and assess the available evidence on the usefulness of mobile apps in (1) diagnosis, (2) prevention, (3) management, and (4) education of TDIs.
Methods: This review examined studies published between January 2012 and August 2024, focusing on randomised controlled trials (RCTs), clinical trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies that assessed the effectiveness of mobile health apps in the management of TDI care. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 for RCTs and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies. The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.
Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including 12 cross-sectional studies and 4 RCTs. The cross-sectional studies primarily assessed knowledge improvement, while the RCTs focused on skill development and practical applications. Quality assessments indicated notable methodological concerns. All four RCTs were rated as high risk of bias due to inadequate randomisation, lack of blinding, and participant attrition. According to the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of the evidence was judged to be very low.
Conclusion: While mobile health applications such as ToothSOS, Dental Trauma, and Injured Tooth show promise in improving knowledge and decision-making related to TDIs, the evidence is limited by high risk of bias and low quality. Future studies should focus on rigorous RCTs and explore AI integration to enhance effectiveness.