Ricardo Cartes-Velásquez, Tomás Varnet-Pérez, Cecilia María Martínez-Delgado, María del Carmen Villanueva-Vilchis, María de los Ángeles Ramírez-Trujillo, Daniel Demétrio Faustino-Silva
{"title":"预防成人口腔疾病的动机访谈:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Ricardo Cartes-Velásquez, Tomás Varnet-Pérez, Cecilia María Martínez-Delgado, María del Carmen Villanueva-Vilchis, María de los Ángeles Ramírez-Trujillo, Daniel Demétrio Faustino-Silva","doi":"10.1111/cdoe.12904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review with meta-analysis was performed to assess whether motivational interviewing (MI) effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Studies considered were randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized controlled trials and community-based randomized trials assessing interventions based on MI or indicating that a counselling technique based on the principles developed by Miller and Rollnick was used. Controls were any type of oral health education or negative controls. Participants were 18–60 years old. The main outcome was any oral morbidity. From 602 studies identified in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS databases, seven studies were included in the synthesis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Studies included only evaluated periodontal outcomes, no studies were found for other oral morbidities. Patients' mean age was 43.7 years, and the follow-up time after MI or MI-based intervention varied between 1 month and 1 year. The total study population was 272 people with moderate-to-severe periodontitis; other groups analysed were pregnant women (<i>n</i> = 112) and patients with mental disorders and alcohol problems (<i>n</i> = 60). Meta-analysis for the plaque index (four studies, <i>n</i> = 267), bleeding on probing (two studies, <i>n</i> = 177) and gingival index (two studies, <i>n</i> = 166) were carried out. The summary effects for the random-effects model were estimated respectively as −3.59 percentage points (CI: [−11.44; 4.25] for plaque index, −6.41 percentage points (CI: [−12.18, −0.65]) for bleeding on probing and −0.70 (CI: [−1.87; 0.48]) for gingival index, marginally favouring the MI group. The reduced number of studies, the non-disclosure of some aspects of the data and the heterogeneity among them undermine the precision of the estimates.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The current evidence available is limited to periodontal outcomes, and it is not possible to determine whether MI effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10580,"journal":{"name":"Community dentistry and oral epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Motivational interviewing for preventing oral morbidities in adults: Systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Ricardo Cartes-Velásquez, Tomás Varnet-Pérez, Cecilia María Martínez-Delgado, María del Carmen Villanueva-Vilchis, María de los Ángeles Ramírez-Trujillo, Daniel Demétrio Faustino-Silva\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cdoe.12904\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>This systematic review with meta-analysis was performed to assess whether motivational interviewing (MI) effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Studies considered were randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized controlled trials and community-based randomized trials assessing interventions based on MI or indicating that a counselling technique based on the principles developed by Miller and Rollnick was used. Controls were any type of oral health education or negative controls. Participants were 18–60 years old. The main outcome was any oral morbidity. From 602 studies identified in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS databases, seven studies were included in the synthesis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Studies included only evaluated periodontal outcomes, no studies were found for other oral morbidities. Patients' mean age was 43.7 years, and the follow-up time after MI or MI-based intervention varied between 1 month and 1 year. The total study population was 272 people with moderate-to-severe periodontitis; other groups analysed were pregnant women (<i>n</i> = 112) and patients with mental disorders and alcohol problems (<i>n</i> = 60). Meta-analysis for the plaque index (four studies, <i>n</i> = 267), bleeding on probing (two studies, <i>n</i> = 177) and gingival index (two studies, <i>n</i> = 166) were carried out. The summary effects for the random-effects model were estimated respectively as −3.59 percentage points (CI: [−11.44; 4.25] for plaque index, −6.41 percentage points (CI: [−12.18, −0.65]) for bleeding on probing and −0.70 (CI: [−1.87; 0.48]) for gingival index, marginally favouring the MI group. The reduced number of studies, the non-disclosure of some aspects of the data and the heterogeneity among them undermine the precision of the estimates.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The current evidence available is limited to periodontal outcomes, and it is not possible to determine whether MI effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Community dentistry and oral epidemiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Community dentistry and oral epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cdoe.12904\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community dentistry and oral epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cdoe.12904","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Motivational interviewing for preventing oral morbidities in adults: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Objective
This systematic review with meta-analysis was performed to assess whether motivational interviewing (MI) effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults.
Methods
Studies considered were randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized controlled trials and community-based randomized trials assessing interventions based on MI or indicating that a counselling technique based on the principles developed by Miller and Rollnick was used. Controls were any type of oral health education or negative controls. Participants were 18–60 years old. The main outcome was any oral morbidity. From 602 studies identified in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS databases, seven studies were included in the synthesis.
Results
Studies included only evaluated periodontal outcomes, no studies were found for other oral morbidities. Patients' mean age was 43.7 years, and the follow-up time after MI or MI-based intervention varied between 1 month and 1 year. The total study population was 272 people with moderate-to-severe periodontitis; other groups analysed were pregnant women (n = 112) and patients with mental disorders and alcohol problems (n = 60). Meta-analysis for the plaque index (four studies, n = 267), bleeding on probing (two studies, n = 177) and gingival index (two studies, n = 166) were carried out. The summary effects for the random-effects model were estimated respectively as −3.59 percentage points (CI: [−11.44; 4.25] for plaque index, −6.41 percentage points (CI: [−12.18, −0.65]) for bleeding on probing and −0.70 (CI: [−1.87; 0.48]) for gingival index, marginally favouring the MI group. The reduced number of studies, the non-disclosure of some aspects of the data and the heterogeneity among them undermine the precision of the estimates.
Conclusion
The current evidence available is limited to periodontal outcomes, and it is not possible to determine whether MI effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology is to serve as a forum for scientifically based information in community dentistry, with the intention of continually expanding the knowledge base in the field. The scope is therefore broad, ranging from original studies in epidemiology, behavioral sciences related to dentistry, and health services research through to methodological reports in program planning, implementation and evaluation. Reports dealing with people of all age groups are welcome.
The journal encourages manuscripts which present methodologically detailed scientific research findings from original data collection or analysis of existing databases. Preference is given to new findings. Confirmations of previous findings can be of value, but the journal seeks to avoid needless repetition. It also encourages thoughtful, provocative commentaries on subjects ranging from research methods to public policies. Purely descriptive reports are not encouraged, nor are behavioral science reports with only marginal application to dentistry.
The journal is published bimonthly.