Title |
Fluoride varnish versus glutaraldehyde for hypersensitive teeth: a randomized controlled trial, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
|
---|---|
Published in |
Clinical Oral Investigations, April 2018
|
DOI | 10.1007/s00784-018-2428-8 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Gowri Sivaramakrishnan, Kannan Sridharan |
Abstract |
Reports indicate Gluma and Duraphat are commonly used in-office agents to treat hypersensitive teeth. Considering this, the aim of this paper is to compare Gluma and Duraphat using a randomized controlled trial, meta-analysis collating evidences from previous studies and trial sequential analysis. Thirty-eight participants were randomized. Hypersensitivity and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded at baseline, 5 min and 7 days. Oral health-related quality of life (OHIP) questionnaire was administered at baseline and 7 days. Statistical analysis was performed to identify significant differences between the variables. For the meta-analysis, electronic data bases were searched and eligible data was extracted and analysed using RevMan 5.0. Trial sequential analysis was performed using O'Brien-Fleming boundary approach for the primary outcome. Both agents caused significant reduction in hypersensitivity and VAS score at 5 min and 7 days in the randomized trial with no superiority. The quality of life significantly improved in patients treated with both the agents. Four studies including the present trial in meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis indicated that Gluma produced significant reduction in VAS scores at 7 days. Gluma produces significant reduction in hypersensitivity at 7 days post treatment compared with Duraphat. There is definite lack of evidence on the long-term effect of these agents. This paper provides strong evidence on the use of Gluma for hypersensitive teeth. This also is a way forward to future research on long-term effects, adverse effects and cost-effectiveness studies. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
Researcher | 6 | 8% |
Unspecified | 5 | 7% |
Other | 2 | 3% |
Other | 7 | 10% |
Unknown | 36 | 50% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 33% |
Unspecified | 4 | 6% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
Energy | 1 | 1% |
Other | 3 | 4% |
Unknown | 37 | 51% |