Fernanda Michel Tavares Canto, Oswaldo de Castro Costa Neto, Jéssica Muniz Loureiro, Guido Artemio Marañón-Vásquez, Daniele Masterson Tavares Pereira Ferreira, Lucianne Cople Maia, Matheus Melo Pithon
{"title":"用于缓解与出牙相关的体征和症状的治疗效果:系统回顾。","authors":"Fernanda Michel Tavares Canto, Oswaldo de Castro Costa Neto, Jéssica Muniz Loureiro, Guido Artemio Marañón-Vásquez, Daniele Masterson Tavares Pereira Ferreira, Lucianne Cople Maia, Matheus Melo Pithon","doi":"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2022.vol36.0066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this review was to systematically evaluate all the existing literature on the efficacy of treatments used to relieve the signs and symptoms associated with teething. A systematic search up to February 2021, without restrictions on language or date of publication, was carried out in MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, LILACS, BBO, OpenGrey, Google Scholar, Portal de Periódicos da CAPES, clinicaltrials.gov, and the references of the included studies. Clinical studies that evaluated the effect of any intervention to alleviate the signs and symptoms associated with teething in babies and children were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the ROB-2 and ROBINS-I tools. The characteristics and results of the individual studies were extracted and synthesized narratively. The GRADE approach was followed to rate the certainty of the evidence. Three randomized and two non-randomized clinical trials were included. The outcomes of these five articles were classified as high or serious risk of bias. Three studies using homeopathy reported improvement in appetite disorders, gum discomfort, and excess salivation. One study showed a new gel with hyaluronic acid was more effective than an anesthetic gel in improving signs and symptoms such as pain, gingival redness, and poor sleep quality. Another study applied non-pharmacological treatments, which were more effective, especially against excess salivation. Although the present systematic review suggests some therapies could have a favorable effect on signs and symptoms related to teething, definitive conclusions on their efficacy cannot be drawn because of the very low certainty of the evidence. The existing literature on the subject is scarce and heterogeneous and has methodological flaws; therefore, further high-quality investigations are necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":48942,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Oral Research","volume":"36 ","pages":"e066"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of treatments used to relieve signs and symptoms associated with teething: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Fernanda Michel Tavares Canto, Oswaldo de Castro Costa Neto, Jéssica Muniz Loureiro, Guido Artemio Marañón-Vásquez, Daniele Masterson Tavares Pereira Ferreira, Lucianne Cople Maia, Matheus Melo Pithon\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2022.vol36.0066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of this review was to systematically evaluate all the existing literature on the efficacy of treatments used to relieve the signs and symptoms associated with teething. A systematic search up to February 2021, without restrictions on language or date of publication, was carried out in MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, LILACS, BBO, OpenGrey, Google Scholar, Portal de Periódicos da CAPES, clinicaltrials.gov, and the references of the included studies. Clinical studies that evaluated the effect of any intervention to alleviate the signs and symptoms associated with teething in babies and children were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the ROB-2 and ROBINS-I tools. The characteristics and results of the individual studies were extracted and synthesized narratively. The GRADE approach was followed to rate the certainty of the evidence. Three randomized and two non-randomized clinical trials were included. The outcomes of these five articles were classified as high or serious risk of bias. Three studies using homeopathy reported improvement in appetite disorders, gum discomfort, and excess salivation. One study showed a new gel with hyaluronic acid was more effective than an anesthetic gel in improving signs and symptoms such as pain, gingival redness, and poor sleep quality. Another study applied non-pharmacological treatments, which were more effective, especially against excess salivation. Although the present systematic review suggests some therapies could have a favorable effect on signs and symptoms related to teething, definitive conclusions on their efficacy cannot be drawn because of the very low certainty of the evidence. The existing literature on the subject is scarce and heterogeneous and has methodological flaws; therefore, further high-quality investigations are necessary.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48942,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brazilian Oral Research\",\"volume\":\"36 \",\"pages\":\"e066\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brazilian Oral Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2022.vol36.0066\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Oral Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2022.vol36.0066","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
本综述的目的是系统地评价所有现有文献中用于缓解与出牙相关的体征和症状的治疗效果。在MEDLINE/PubMed、SCOPUS、Web of Science、The Cochrane Library、EMBASE、LILACS、BBO、OpenGrey、Google Scholar、Portal de Periódicos da CAPES、clinicaltrials.gov和纳入研究的参考文献中进行系统检索,检索截止到2021年2月,不受语言和出版日期的限制。临床研究评估了任何干预措施的效果,以减轻与婴儿和儿童出牙相关的体征和症状。使用rob2和ROBINS-I工具评估偏倚风险。对个别研究的特点和结果进行了提取和叙述综合。采用GRADE方法对证据的确定性进行评级。纳入3个随机临床试验和2个非随机临床试验。这五篇文章的结果被归类为高偏倚风险或严重偏倚风险。三项使用顺势疗法的研究报告了食欲障碍、牙龈不适和唾液分泌过多的改善。一项研究表明,一种含有透明质酸的新型凝胶在改善疼痛、牙龈发红和睡眠质量差等症状和体征方面比麻醉凝胶更有效。另一项研究采用非药物治疗,这更有效,特别是对过度流涎。虽然目前的系统综述表明,一些治疗方法可能对出牙相关的体征和症状有良好的影响,但由于证据的确定性非常低,因此无法得出关于其疗效的明确结论。现有的关于这一主题的文献是稀缺和异质的,并且有方法上的缺陷;因此,进一步的高质量研究是必要的。
Efficacy of treatments used to relieve signs and symptoms associated with teething: a systematic review.
The purpose of this review was to systematically evaluate all the existing literature on the efficacy of treatments used to relieve the signs and symptoms associated with teething. A systematic search up to February 2021, without restrictions on language or date of publication, was carried out in MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, LILACS, BBO, OpenGrey, Google Scholar, Portal de Periódicos da CAPES, clinicaltrials.gov, and the references of the included studies. Clinical studies that evaluated the effect of any intervention to alleviate the signs and symptoms associated with teething in babies and children were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the ROB-2 and ROBINS-I tools. The characteristics and results of the individual studies were extracted and synthesized narratively. The GRADE approach was followed to rate the certainty of the evidence. Three randomized and two non-randomized clinical trials were included. The outcomes of these five articles were classified as high or serious risk of bias. Three studies using homeopathy reported improvement in appetite disorders, gum discomfort, and excess salivation. One study showed a new gel with hyaluronic acid was more effective than an anesthetic gel in improving signs and symptoms such as pain, gingival redness, and poor sleep quality. Another study applied non-pharmacological treatments, which were more effective, especially against excess salivation. Although the present systematic review suggests some therapies could have a favorable effect on signs and symptoms related to teething, definitive conclusions on their efficacy cannot be drawn because of the very low certainty of the evidence. The existing literature on the subject is scarce and heterogeneous and has methodological flaws; therefore, further high-quality investigations are necessary.