| Title |
Is there a place for Tooth Mousse® in the prevention and treatment of early dental caries? A systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Oral Health, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12903-015-0095-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah Raphael, Anthony Blinkhorn |
| Abstract |
It is important for Dental Professionals to consider the evidence for the effectiveness of the preventive strategies used to maintain good oral health and reduce the risk of caries in their patients. Whilst many of the traditional preventive activities, including the recommendation and use of fluoride products and the placement of fissure sealants have a wealth of clinical evidence to support their use, some of the newer preventive agents have a more limited evidence base. In order to investigate the level of scientific support behind one such technology, a systematic literature review was carried out to assess the effectiveness of Tooth Mousse® (MI Paste®) and Tooth Mousse Plus® (MI Paste Plus®) in the prevention and treatment of early dental caries. A broad search strategy using Medline via OvidSP and EMBASE was performed in order to capture all published studies to related Casein Phosphopeptide-Amorphous Calcium Phosphate. In addition to the above searches the terms "CPP ACP" and "casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate" were searched using PREMEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Inclusion criteria were clinical trials of participants of any age, comparing the use of Tooth Mousse® (MI Paste®) or Tooth Mousse Plus® (MI Paste Plus®) to a routine oral care regimen and reporting recognised clinical outcome measures for early caries lesions. Only research studies in English were selected. 7576 articles were identified, but the majority were duplicates. Once these were removed 172 articles were inspected and the focus on 'CPP-ACP formulations of Tooth Mousse® (MI Paste®) and Tooth Mousse Plus® (MI Paste Plus®) resulted in 29 articles being selected, and of these 12 studies met the inclusion criteria and were considered acceptable for the systematic review. The overall findings of this review did not show any significant benefits of using Tooth Mousse® (MI Paste®) products over brushing with a fluoride toothpaste for the prevention of early dental caries. With regard to the regression of white spot lesions in orthodontic patients there is a tendency towards a benefit for the use of Tooth Mousse® (MI Paste®) but the quality of evidence is limited. There is a lack of evidence to support the use of Tooth Mousse Plus® (MI Paste Plus®) over Tooth Mousse® (MI Paste®) at this time. This review suggests that further well-designed randomized controlled trials are required prior to the widespread recommendation of Tooth Mousse® products for the prevention and treatment of early dental caries in the general population. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 164 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Researcher | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 30 | 18% |
| Unknown | 59 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 84 | 51% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | <1% |
| Unspecified | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 64 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 July 2019.
All research outputs
#2,375,205
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#98
of 1,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,747
of 274,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#5
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,469 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.