Nature-Based Interventions Targeting Elderly People's Health and Well-Being: An Evidence Map

BACKGROUND

Healthy aging encompasses more than the absence of disease, emphasizing the preservation of functional abilities for enhanced well-being and quality of life. Nature-based interventions are scientifically proven contributors to healthy aging.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence map showcasing nature-based interventions targeting older individuals' health and well-being.

METHODS

The evidence map was developed through critical analysis of systematic reviews and clinical trials utilizing the tools AMSTAR2 and CONSORT. A systematic search spanning the past decade was conducted across databases: Cochrane, SCOPUS, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and LILACS.

RESULTS

Twelve articles met the eligibility criteria. Nature-based interventions such as forest bathing, hiking, therapeutic gardens, virtual reality, and forest sounds were identified. Outcomes were categorized into physical aspects (cardiovascular and pulmonary; neuro-immuno-endocrinological) and mental/behavioral aspects. The final map integrated interventions, outcomes, and quality assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey highlights the positive impact of nature-based interventions on the health of the elderly. This study provides insights across various domains, fostering the development of programs and policies in management to promote healthy aging. Regarding healthcare, it encourages discourse among professionals regarding the integration of nature-based practices for equitable care in both individual and group settings. Furthermore, it underscores the need for research in the Southern Hemisphere, particularly in Brazil, where the study was conducted.

Effectiveness of endodontic tissue engineering in treatment of apical periodontitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Regenerative endodontics has evolved in recent years with tissue engineering concepts in particular appearing promising. Endodontic tissue engineering (ETE) describes the various approaches based on the orthograde introduction of scaffolds or biomaterials (with or without cells) into the root canal to achieve pulp tissue regeneration. There are currently no systematic reviews investigating whether ETE is a suitable method for the treatment of endodontic disease in both mature and immature permanent teeth.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of ETE in permanent teeth with pulp necrosis in comparison with conventional endodontic treatment.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library for published reports as well as Google Scholar for grey literature up to November 2021. Included were studies of patients with permanent immature or mature teeth and pulp necrosis with or without signs of apical periodontitis (P) comparing ETE (I) with calcium hydroxide apexification, apical plug and root canal treatment (C) in terms of tooth survival, pain, tenderness, swelling, need for medication (analgesics and antibiotics), radiographic evidence of reduction in apical lesion size, radiographic evidence of normal periodontal ligament space, function (fracture and restoration longevity), the need for further intervention, adverse effects (including exacerbation, restoration integrity, allergy and discolouration), oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), presence of sinus tract and response to sensibility testing (O). An observation period of at least 12 months was mandatory (T) and the number of patients in human experimental studies or longitudinal observational studies had to be at least 20 (10 in each arm) at the end (S). Risk of bias was appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool. Two authors independently screened the records, assessed full texts for eligibility and evaluated risk of bias. Heterogeneity of outcomes and limited body of evidence did not allow for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Two randomized clinical trials investigating cell transplantation approaches with a total of 76 participants (40 treated immature teeth and 36 treated mature teeth) were included for qualitative analysis. Both studies had moderate concerns in terms of risk of bias. Due to the lack of homogeneity a meta-analysis was not possible. Tooth survival for ETE, root canal treatment and apexification was 100% after 12 months. Teeth treated with ETE showed a higher number of cases with positive pulpal responses to sensitivity tests and with blood perfusion compared with root canal treatment or apexification.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review highlights that there is limited evidence for ETE approaches. Even though the results of this review suggest a high survival with ETE in mature and immature teeth, there is a moderate risk of bias due to methodological limitations in the included studies, so the overall results should be interpreted with caution. Lack of a robust control group was a common problem during literature screening, and outcomes besides dental survival were reported inconsistently. Future clinical trials need to address methodical as well as assessment concerns and report long-term results.

CONCLUSION

The benefits and high survival rates reported for ETE techniques suggest that this procedure might be an alternative to conventional procedures for permanent teeth with pulpal necrosis. However, more appropriate studies are needed to derive clinical recommendations.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021266350).

Drug Testing for Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes in Animals versus Humans: A Comparative Analysis of Study Designs and Reporting Qualities

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes is a highly prevalent accelerator or even cause of chronic kidney disease imposing a large unmet medical need at the global scale. Massive research activities continue to be in search of a cure but the yield of the classical bench-to-bedside research approach has been low. We speculated that a significant mismatch in design and quality of animal and clinical studies in this domain is a hurdle for translation.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of matched pairs of animal and human studies that tested the efficacy of distinct drug interventions for diabetic kidney disease (DKD). We reviewed study designs and reporting quality of such studies over the last decade according to the standards listed in the CONSORT and ARRIVE recommendations, respectively.

RESULTS

We noted a wide diversity in the study designs of animal studies in terms of diabetes induction. Major mismatches with the respective human studies referred to age and sex distribution, comorbidities, stage of the kidney disease, and selection of primary endpoints. Usually, treatment was initiated before onset of kidney disease without any standard of care as a background therapy. The reporting quality of animal studies was poor for randomization procedures, blinding, sample size calculation for a prespecified primary endpoint or the safety analysis. Reporting quality of clinical studies had deficits in trial design-, recruitment-, allocation-, and outcome-related aspects.

CONCLUSION

Bench-to-bedside translation in the domain of DKD suffers from major deficits in the design of experimental studies in view of the projected clinical trials as well as from significant deficits in the reporting quality in preclinical and clinical studies.

An Analysis of the Evidence Underpinning the American Academy Orthopaedic Surgery Pediatrics Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Randomized control trials (RCTs) serve as evidentiary support for recommendations underpinning clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with the goal of optimizing patient care. A knowledge gap exists within scientific literature when evaluating the quality of RCTs used as evidence in the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS) pediatric CPGs. We aim to evaluate the reporting quality and risk of bias in RCTs underlying AAOS Pediatric CPG recommendations.

METHODS

We located all AAOS Pediatric CPGs. We then extracted all RCTs from the CPG reference sections. All included RCTs were evaluated using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist and Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias assessment tool (RoB 2.0). Descriptive statistics were recorded, and bivariate analysis was used to account for variance in CONSORT scores. A Mann-Whitney U test was completed to compare CONSORT studies published before and after 2010.

RESULTS

Three CPGs and 23 RCTs met inclusion criteria. Mean CONSORT adherence was 69.8% (21.6/31). The lowest adhered to CONSORT items were 10, 23, and 24, while items 2a, 13a, and 18 displayed the highest adherence. Ten RCTs (43.5%, 10/23) had "low" risk of bias, 5 RCTs (21.7%, 5/23) were of "some concerns," and 8 RCTs (34.8%, 8/23) received a "high" designation for risk of bias. There were no statistically significant associations in the bivariate regression analysis or Mann-Whitney U test.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that CONSORT adherence within RCTs used as evidence in AAOS Pediatric CPGs is substandard-relying on evidence that, in some cases, is >20 years old. Many of the RCTs cited as supporting evidence have a "high" risk of bias. Altogether, these CPGs may need to be updated or expanded to include more recent evidence relevant to pediatric orthopaedic surgery.

Challenging the Concept that OptiBond FL and Clearfil SE Bond in NCCLs Are Gold Standard Adhesives: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The following PICO (Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes) question was proposed: "Are retention rates of composite resin restorations in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) when using adhesives considered "gold standard" (OptiBond FL and Clearfil SE Bond) higher than those obtained with other adhesives brands"?

METHODS

A search was performed in February 2019 (updated in November 2019) in the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, BBO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Grey Literature, and IADR abstracts (1990-2018); unpublished and ongoing trial registries, dissertations, and theses were also searched. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) conducted in NCCLs that compared either OptiBond FL or Clearfil SE Bond adhesive with other commercially available adhesives were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was applied by using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. A meta-analysis was performed for retention rates at different follow-up times using a random effects model for both the adhesives. Heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochran Q test and I2 statistics. Grading of Recommendations: Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessed the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

After removal of duplicates and noneligible articles, 25 studies remained for qualitative synthesis, as one study was common to the two adhesives, of which 9 studies were used for the OptiBond FL meta-analysis and 14 for the Clearfil SE Bond meta-analysis. No significant differences were observed for retention rates in follow-up periods of 12-24 months (p=0.97), 36-48 months (p=0.72), or 108-156 months (p=0.73) for OptiBond FL; and for 12-24 months (p=0.10) and 36-48 months (p=0.17) for Clearfil SE Bond. A significant difference was only found for OptiBond FL at 60-96 months (p=0.02), but only three studies were included in this meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from available RCTs conducted in NCCLs that compared OptiBond FL or Clearfil SE Bond does not support the widespread concept that these adhesives are better than any other competitive brands available in the dental market.

Compliance of randomized controlled trials in posterior restorations with the CONSORT statement: a systematic review of methodology

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate the compliance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in posterior restorations with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement (CONSORT) statement and to analyze the risk of bias (RoB) of these studies.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS/BBO, and Cochrane Library. Only RCTs published in peer-reviewed journals were included. The compliance with the CONSORT was evaluated in a 0-2 scale where 0 = no description, 1 = poor description and 2 = adequate description. Descriptive analyses of the CONSORT mean score by journal, country, and RoB were performed. The RoB in RCTs was evaluated by using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool version 1.0.

RESULTS

A total of 15,476 studies were identified after duplicates removal. O only 202 meet the eligibility criteria, among which 31 were follow-up studies. Concerning the overall RoB, only 29 out of 171 were classified as low risk of bias. The overall mean CONSORT score was 19 ± 5.4 points, which means compliance of approximately 59%. Significant differences among countries, publication period, and RoB were observed (p < 0.001). The journal's impact factor was not correlated with the overall CONSORT score (p = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

The adherence of RCTs conducted in posterior restorations to the CONSORT Statement is still low. In addition, most studies were classified as at unclear risk of bias. These results call up an urgent need for improvement.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Most RCTs conducted in posterior teeth have poor reporting and are mainly classified as having an unclear risk of bias.

CONSORT Compliance in Randomized Clinical Trials of Regenerative Endodontic treatments of Necrotic Immature Teeth. A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate methodological quality of clinical trials in regenerative endodontics and its compliance with the CONSORT statement.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in eight electronic databases. Only clinical trials whose participants underwent regenerative endodontic treatment on necrotic permanent immature teeth were included. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool (RoB, version 2.0). Compliance of articles with the CONSORT guidelines was assessed by a tool with scales: 0 = no description, 1 = deficient, and 2 = adequate description, totaling a maximum score of 32 points. The Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare the scores between journals, studies, country, income levels, and publication periods. Spearman correlation analyses were performed between CONSORT compliance scores and 2019 journal CiteScore values, publication year, and quality assessment.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included. The average CONSORT compliance score was 20.95 (±6.19). The better reported items were the description of the interventions performed in the trials (100%), followed by the description of the number of patients analyzed, losses and exclusions (90%) and the hypothesis tested (85%). Within the 20 studies, 3 articles were classified as "low risk of bias," 8 studies were classified as "some concerns" and 9 studies were considered "high risk of bias". Studies carried out in countries with higher income levels presented higher CONSORT scores. Significant moderate correlations were found between the CONSORT score and the percentage of risk of bias in low-risk domains (r_s = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.31 to 0.94, p = 0.003) and the overall risk of bias categories (r_s = 0.76, 95%CI = 0.54 to 0.98, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The adequacy of reporting based on the CONSORT checklist items of regenerative endodontic trials was low with a moderate to high risk of bias.

Clinical Performance of Filled/Nanofilled Versus Nonfilled Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of filled adhesive systems does not influence the clinical performance of the adhesive restoration in noncarious cervical lesions.

SUMMARY

COMPLIANCE OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS ON DENTAL CARIES PREVENTION METHODS WITH THE CONSORT STATEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

OBJECTIVE

Reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry remains suboptimal. Considering the positive impact of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines on the quality of evidence in RCTs, the main objective of this systematic review was to determine whether RCTs on dental caries prevention conform to these guidelines. The secondary objective was to assess the association between CONSORT adherence and the year and impact factor of the journal in which the study was published.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in different databases using appropriate terms to retrieve RCTs that assessed the caries-preventive effect of at least 2 of the following materials-fluoride varnish, resin-based fissure sealants, and ionomer-based fissure sealants-on the occlusal surfaces of permanent molars. Since the first CONSORT statement was published in 1996, a time frame from 1997 to 2020 was established for the identification of studies. Selected articles were assessed according to their adherence to the CONSORT statement, risk of bias (Cochrane risk of bias tool, RoB 2.0), and journal impact factor based on the InCites Journal Citation Reports. The year of publication and other relevant data were also recorded. SPSS (SPSS Statistics 25.0, IBM©) was used to perform the linear correlation analyses to determine the relationship between the article CONSORT score (previously determined) and the year of publication and journal impact factor. A significance level of 5% was established for all analyses.

RESULTS

Of 3196 references retrieved, 30 articles were selected and evaluated. Using RoB 2.0, 8 studies were classified as having a high risk of bias, 16 as having some concerns about the risk of bias assessment, and 6 as having a low risk of bias. Concerning CONSORT adherence, 77% of the studies adequately reported the intervention domain, since the methodology for the application of fluoride varnish or sealant materials was thoroughly described. However, the participants' setting and location, random sequence generation, randomization, and the flowchart description of the losses/exclusions domains were poorly reported. Meanwhile, the allocation concealment process was not reported in 83% of the articles. Correlation analyses indicated a positive relationship between CONSORT adherence and the year of publication, as well as the journal impact factor.

CONCLUSION

When assessing clinical trials on the prevention of occlusal caries, most RCTs examined followed the CONSORT statement. However, some methodological domains remain poorly reported, demonstrating the need to improve CONSORT compliance in these RCTs.

Adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Guidelines for Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials Related to Mandibular Third Molars

PURPOSE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the backbone of evidence-based medicine. Despite the widespread acceptance of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), its use for reporting clinical trials in journals remains poor. The purpose of this study was to find out to what extent RCTs related to mandibular third molars have adhered to the CONSORT statement.

METHODS

This study was carried out during April 2020 to June 2020. PubMed was used to retrieve RCTs related to mandibular third molars conducted during the last 5 years. The search terms used were mandibular third molar OR lower third molar OR impacted mandibular third molar AND randomized controlled trial. Each article was assessed for adherence to the CONSORT statement.

RESULTS

Eighty unique articles were retrieved. The mean percentage adherence to the CONSORT statement noted was 60.26%. Of the 37 CONSORT items, only 4 items showed 100% adherence (2a, 2b, 4a, and 12a). The most underreported items were #10, 12b, 17a, 17b, 18, 19, 23 to 25. Of the 23 journals considered, 6 journals did not recommend CONSORT for reporting RCT in the "Instructions to Authors" guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of the study, it is clear that the RCTs related to third molar do not show 100% adherence to the CONSORT checklist. The editorial policy, peer reviewers, and researchers should endorse the use of the CONSORT checklist for transparent reporting of the RCTs.

A New Dual-cure Universal Simplified Adhesive: 18-month Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Non-carious cervical lesion restorations using a dual-cure universal adhesive in self-etch and etch-and-rinse mode showed satisfactory clinical performance after 18 months.

SUMMARY

Objectives: The objective of this multicenter, double-blind, split-mouth randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a new dual-cure universal adhesive system (Futurabond U, Voco GmBH) when applied using different strategies over a period of 18 months.Methods and Materials: Fifty patients participated in this study. Two hundred non-carious cervical lesions were restored using the adhesive Futurabond U according to four adhesive strategies (n=50 per group): only self-etch (SEE), selective enamel etching + self-etch (SET), etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERDry), and etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERWet). After the adhesive application, cavities were restored using Admira Fusion composite resin. These restorations were evaluated according to FDI World Dental Federation criteria for the following characteristics: retention/fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity, and caries recurrence.Results: After 18 months, only four patients (12 months: one patient, n=4 restorations; and 18 months: three patients, n=12 restorations) were not evaluated. Fourteen restorations were lost after 18 months of clinical evaluation (four for SEE, three for SET, three for ERDry, and four for ERWet). The retention rates for 18 months (95% confidence interval) were 92% (81%-97%) for SEE, 94% (83%-97%) for SET, 94% (83%-97%) for ERDry, and 92% (81%-97%) for ERWet (p>0.05). Thirty-eight restorations were considered to have minor discrepancies in marginal adaptation at the 18-month recall (13 for SEE, 13 for SET, six for ERDry, and six for ERWet; p>0.05). Fourteen restorations were detected as a minor marginal discoloration at the 18-month recall (six for SEE, six for SET, one for ERDry, and one for ERWet; p>0.05). However, all were considered clinically acceptable. No restorations showed postoperative sensitivity or caries recurrence at the time.Conclusion: The clinical performance of the Futurabond U did not depend on the bonding strategy used, and it was considered reliable after 18 months of clinical evaluation, although more marginal discrepancy was observed in the self-etch group.

Catechin-based Dentin Pretreatment and the Clinical Performance of a Universal Adhesive: A Two-year Randomized Clinical Trial

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

At 24 months, the dentin pretreatment with epigallocatechin-3-gallate did not impair the clinical performance of the adhesive Single Bond Universal regardless of the bonding strategy used.

SUMMARY

Purpose: To evaluate the two-year effect of dentin pretreatment with epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) on the clinical performance of restorations of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) with Single Bond Universal, applied in two different modes (self-etch and etch-and-rinse).Methods and Materials: In this randomized clinical trial, 33 volunteers were selected, and 156 NCCLs were assigned to four groups: ER, etch-and-rinse; ER-EGCG, 0.1% EGCG dentin pretreatment + etch-and-rinse; SE, self-etch; and SE-EGCG, 0.1% EGCG dentin pretreatment + self-etch. The NCCLs were restored with a nanofilled resin composite and evaluated at baseline and at six, 12, 18, and 24 months using FDI criteria for retention, marginal staining, marginal adaptation, caries, and postoperative sensitivity. Two evaluators were blinded to the treatments performed, and impressions were taken for resin replicas to allow indirect observations. Statistical analyses were performed with Kruskal-Wallis and McNemar tests with a significance level of 5%.Results: Six restorations (one from ER, two from SE, one from ER-EGCG, and two from SEEGCG) were lost at 24 months with no significant differences (p>0.05). The retention rates were 97.0% (ER and ER-EGCG), 94.1% (SE), and 94.2% (SE-EGCG). For marginal adaptation, a significant difference was detected between the baseline and 24 months for the SE group (p=0.0313). There were no statistical differences among all other evaluated criteria at 24 months, neither for each group at baseline nor for 24-month comparisons (p>0.05).Conclusions: The pretreatment with EGCG provided no benefit in the clinical performance of the adhesive regardless of the bonding strategy used. In addition, it adds an additional required step to the restorative procedure.

Efficacy of a Light-cured Tetracaine-based Anesthetic Gel for Rubber Dam Clamp Placement: A Triple-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of a new light-cured anesthetic gel for pain control in adults undergoing rubber dam isolation for the restorative treatment of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This study was a randomized, split-mouth, triple-blind, controlled trial. The sample comprised 50 adults with at least one pair of NCCLs located in the same arch but on opposite sides. Simple randomization defined the tooth to receive the light-cured tetracaine-based anesthetic gel or the placebo gel. After cotton roll isolation, the gels were applied in the gingival tissue around the tooth with the aid of the applicator tip of a syringe, left in place for 15 seconds, and light-cured for 15 seconds. Then, a #212 clamp was positioned on the tooth. If the patient reported pain, the clamp was removed, the patient filled out a pain intensity form (a 0-10 visual analog scale [VAS] and a 0-4 verbal rating scale [VRS]) and an injectable anesthetic was applied before rubber dam isolation for the restorative procedure. The absolute risk, intensity of pain, and need for rescue anesthesia were analyzed by the McNemar test and the Wilcoxon signed rank test (α=5%).

RESULTS

The odds ratio [OR] for pain (OR=3.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.1 to 14.6; p=0.03) showed lower reports of pain for the light-cured anesthetic gel. One in five patients will benefit from placement of the light-cured anesthetic gel. On average, pain intensity was one VAS unit lower in those using the light-cured anesthetic gel than in those using the placebo gel. For the VRS, the pain intensity for the light-cured anesthetic gel was 0.4 units lower than the pain intensity for the placebo gel (95% CI=-0.9 to 0.07). The OR for rescue anesthesia was 2.5 (95% CI=0.7 to 10.9; p=0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

The light-cured, tetracaine-based anesthetic gel reduced the absolute risk of pain by 20% in NCCLs.

Systematic review versus structured critical analysis

Objective: This analysis discusses common problems with systematic reviews (SRs) and presents a novel solution, the structured critical analysis (SCA) that can be incorporated into a SR or used as an alternative literature review design.Methods: A cross-sectional survey of current SRs related to interdisciplinary restorative dentistry was obtained by evaluating 100 current SRs for their self-reported methodological quality and its effect on scientific validity.Results: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocol (PRISMA) was used in 99/100 SRs, but only 8/100 reported a low risk of bias. High statistical heterogeneity precluding meta-analysis was found in 44/100 SRs. Only 94 paragraphs/100 SRs provided critical analysis.Discussion: Significant problems were found with current SRs that can compromise their reliability as the premier level of evidence for clinical science research. The reader must be aware of these deficiencies to correctly interpret the SR and cannot rely on the format alone.