scholarly journals Positional and dimensional temporomandibular joint changes after correction of posterior crossbite in growing patients:A systematic review

2018 ◽  
Vol 88 (5) ◽  
pp. 638-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed T. Ellabban ◽  
Ahmed I. Abdul-Aziz ◽  
Mona M. Salah Fayed ◽  
Mai H. AboulFotouh ◽  
Ehab S. Elkattan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Temporomandibular Joint ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
The Other ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Posterior Crossbite ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Spontaneous Correction

ABSTRACT Objective: To elucidate the positional and dimensional temporomandibular joint (TMJ) changes after correction of posterior crossbite in growing patients. Materials and Methods: A systematic unrestricted search was done in six databases until June 27, 2017. A manual search in the reference lists of the included studies and gray literature was also performed. The eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials and prospective nonrandomized controlled clinical trials and a sample of growing subjects with posterior crossbite that required maxillary expansion. Risk of bias assessment was performed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias Tool. The literature search, study inclusion, risk of bias assessment, evaluation of quality of evidence (GRADE), and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently. Results: Only two articles were finally eligible to be included in the qualitative analysis. Both studies were RCTs and were assessed as having unclear risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible since one study used cone-beam computed tomography as an assessment tool while the other used ultrasonography. One study reported significant reduction in the condylar positional difference between centric and habitual occlusion in the treatment group, while no spontaneous correction of condylar asymmetric position occurred in the control group. The other study reported minor changes of condylar position in both treatment and control groups. Conclusions: The current available data provide insufficient and weak evidence to form a solid and firm conclusion. There is poor, very low-quality evidence regarding the positional and dimensional effects of posterior crossbite correction on the TMJs.

scholarly journals Recent Research Trends in Moxibustion Treatment in Korea

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Ju-Hyeon Lee ◽  
Doo-ree Hwang ◽  
Seung-Hyo Hong
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Korean Traditional Medicine ◽  
Study Type ◽  
Circulatory Diseases

A total of 1,235 studies were retrieved on June 23, 2019, from 3 databases. Selected 59 studies were evaluated by year of publication, study type, subject condition/disease, acupoint, standards for reporting interventions in clinical trials of moxibustion (STRICTOM), Cochrane risk of bias (RoB), and risk of bias assessment tool for non-randomized study (RoBANS). Most studies were conducted in 2011, after which the number of studies decreased. The most common study type was 25 case reports (CR), 16 uncontrolled clinical trials (UCT), 11 randomized controlled trials (RCT), and 7 controlled clinical trials (CCT). Moxibustion treatment was mainly used for musculoskeletal and circulatory diseases/conditions. A total of 83 acupoints were used, A-shi points being the most used. As for STRICTOM, an average of 7.4 items were satisfactory for UCT and CR without a control group, and an average of 9.4 items were satisfactory for RCT and CCT. RCT was assessed using the RoB, and many items were rated as uncertain. In this study, the need for RCT of moxibustion treatment in Korea was identified. The detailed description of study methods and results will provide evidence for the efficacy of moxibustion treatment in preventive and therapeutic aspects of Korean traditional medicine.

scholarly journals Acupuncture combined with medication for opioid use disorder in adults: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e034554
Author(s):  
Zhihan Chen ◽  
Rui Wang ◽  
Min Zhang ◽  
Yitong Wang ◽  
Yulan Ren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Assess Quality ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionOpioid use disorder (OUD) is a worldwide health problem. Clinical trials indicated that acupuncture combined with medication is effective in OUD, however, there are different conclusions presented by previous trials. This study is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture combined with medication in OUD.Methods and analysisPubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses, AMED, OpenGrey, Clinicaltrials.gov and who.int/trialsearch will be searched in September 2019 without a language restriction. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs which included participants with OUD receiving acupuncture therapy combined with medication versus control group will be included in this study. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data, assess risk of bias by the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool and assess quality of evidence by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Any disagreements will be arbitrated by the third reviewer. Data synthesis and analysis will be conducted by using RevMan V.5.3. Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analysis, meta-regression and reporting bias assessment will be conducted if necessary and appropriate.Ethics and disseminationOn account of the nature of this systematic review and meta-analysis, ethical approval is not required. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019123436.

scholarly journals Prognostic models for predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in resource-limited countries: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e035045
Author(s):  
Morris Ogero ◽  
Rachel Jelagat Sarguta ◽  
Lucas Malla ◽  
Jalemba Aluvaala ◽  
Ambrose Agweyu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Model Development ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Prognostic Models ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Bias Assessment

ObjectivesTo identify and appraise the methodological rigour of multivariable prognostic models predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).DesignSystematic review of peer-reviewed journals.Data sourcesMEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and Web of Science electronic databases since inception to August 2019.Eligibility criteriaWe included model development studies predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in LMIC.Data extraction and synthesisThis systematic review followed the Checklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies framework. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). No quantitative summary was conducted due to substantial heterogeneity that was observed after assessing the studies included.ResultsOur search strategy identified a total of 4054 unique articles. Among these, 3545 articles were excluded after review of titles and abstracts as they covered non-relevant topics. Full texts of 509 articles were screened for eligibility, of which 15 studies reporting 21 models met the eligibility criteria. Based on the PROBAST tool, risk of bias was assessed in four domains; participant, predictors, outcome and analyses. The domain of statistical analyses was the main area of concern where none of the included models was judged to be of low risk of bias.ConclusionThis review identified 21 models predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in LMIC. However, most reports characterising these models are of poor quality when judged against recent reporting standards due to a high risk of bias. Future studies should adhere to standardised methodological criteria and progress from identifying new risk scores to validating or adapting existing scores.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018088599.

scholarly journals Retention period after treatment of posterior crossbite with maxillary expansion: a systematic review

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Garcia Costa ◽  
Thaís Magalhães Galindo ◽  
Claudia Trindade Mattos ◽  
Adriana de Alcantara Cury-Saramago
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Retention Period ◽  
Posterior Crossbite ◽  
Acrylic Plate ◽  
Removable Appliances ◽  
Quad Helix

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the duration of the retention period in growing patients undergoing maxillary expansion and its relation with posterior crossbite stability. METHODS: Search strategies were executed for electronic databases Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus, which were completed on January 15, 2016. The inclusion criteria included randomized, prospective or retrospective controlled trials in growing subjects with posterior crossbite; treated with maxillary expanders; retention phase after expansion; post-retention phase of at least 6 months. The exclusion criteria were anterior crossbite, craniofacial anomalies, surgery or another orthodontic intervention; case reports; author’s opinions articles, thesis, literature reviews and systematic reviews. The risk of bias of selected articles was assessed with Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and Downs and Black checklist for non-RCTs. RESULTS: A total of 156 titles/abstracts was retrieved, 44 full-texts were examined, and 6 articles were selected and assessed for their methodological quality. The retention period after maxillary expansion ranged between 4 weeks and 16 months. Fixed (acrylic plate, Haas, Hyrax and quad-helix) or removable (Hawley and Hawley expander) appliances were used for retention. CONCLUSIONS: Six months of retention with either fixed or removable appliances seem to be enough to avoid relapse or to guarantee minimal changes in a short-term follow-up.

scholarly journals Toolkit of methodological resources to conduct systematic reviews

F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 82
Author(s):  
Marta Roqué ◽  
Laura Martínez-García ◽  
Ivan Solà ◽  
Pablo Alonso-Coello ◽  
Xavier Bonfill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Model Study ◽  
Question Development

Background: Systematic reviews (SR) can be classified by type depending on the research question they are based on. This work identifies and describes the most relevant methodological resources to conduct high-quality reviews that answer clinical questions regarding prevalence, prognosis, diagnostic accuracy and efficacy of interventions. Methods: Methodological resources have been identified from literature searches and consulting guidelines from institutions that develop SRs. The selected resources are organized by type of SR, and stage of development of the review (formulation of the research question, development of the protocol, literature search, risk of bias assessment, synthesis of findings, assessment of the quality of evidence, and report of SR results and conclusions). Results: Although the different types of SRs are developed following the same steps, each SR type requires specific methods, differing in characteristics and complexity. The extent of methodological development varies by type of SR, with more solid guidelines available for diagnostic accuracy and efficacy of interventions SRs. This methodological toolkit describes the most up-to-date risk of bias instruments: Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool and Prediction model study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) for prognostic SRs, Quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool (QUADAS-2) for diagnostic accuracy SRs, Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB-2) and Risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions studies tool (ROBINS-I) for efficacy of interventions SRs, as well as the latest developments on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Conclusions: This structured compilation of the best methodological resources for each type of SR may prove to be a very useful tool for those researchers that wish to develop SRs or conduct methodological research works on SRs.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Qingfei Paidu Decoction for Treating COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qi Wang ◽  
Hongfei Zhu ◽  
Mengting Li ◽  
Yafei Liu ◽  
Honghao Lai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conventional Treatment ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms

Background: Qingfei Paidu decoction (QFPD) has been widely used in treating COVID-19 in China. However, there is still a lack of comprehensive and systematic evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of QFPD. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of QFPD in patients with COVID-19.Methods: We searched seven databases up to 5 March 2021. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data of interest, and assessed risk of bias. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of bias of cohort and non-randomized trials. The “Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies With No Control Group” was adopted for controlled pre–post studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. We carried out a random effect meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3. For outcomes that could not be meta-analyzed, we performed a descriptive analysis.Results: We identified 16 studies with 11,237 patients, including one RCT, six non-randomized trials, two cohort studies, and seven pre–post studies. The certainty of evidence was low to very low because of the observational study design. QFPD combined with conventional treatment might decrease the time for nucleic acid conversion (MD = −4.78 days, 95% CI: −5.79 to −3.77), shorten the length of hospital stay (MD = −7.95 days, 95% CI: −14.66 to −1.24), shorten the duration of symptoms recovery of fever (MD = −1.51 days, 95% CI: −1.92 to −1.09), cough (MD = −1.64 days, 95% CI: −1.91 to −1.36) and chest CT (MD = −2.23 days, 95% CI: −2.46 to −2.00), improve the overall traditional Chinese medicine symptom scores (MD = 41.58 scores, 95% CI: 32.67 to 50.49), and change the laboratory indexes, such as WBC, AST, and CRP.Conclusion: QFPD combined with conventional treatment might be effective for patients with COVID-19. No serious adverse reactions related to QFPD were observed. Further high-quality studies are still needed in the future.

scholarly journals Dental Composite Restorations Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 707-738
Author(s):  
Abdulmohsen Al Rabiah ◽  
Alamri Zahrah ◽  
Tuwaym Malath ◽  
Al Daghri Ebtihal ◽  
Al Suhaibani Daniyah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Dental Composite ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Bias Assessment

Background: Controversy exists in the literature regarding the most optimal repair procedure for improving the adhesion between the repair resin and the existing resin composite materials. Hence the aim of the present study was to do a systematic review and to analyze the adhesion potential of resin-based composites to similar and dissimilar composites and aimed to determine the possible dominant factors affecting the bond strength results. Materials & Methods: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort design were searched through electronic databases including MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) until July 2020 that compared different methods of composite restoration repair and a minimum mean follow-up time of 1 year. There were no restrictions on a particular treatment indication or outcome measures. Two authors independently conducted screening, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction of eligible trials in duplicate. We applied the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to consider the risk of bias. Results: We identified 10 articles; two of them were RCTs, and eight prospective cohort studies. There were 530 participants, with 990 teeth, dealing with resin-based composite (RBC) restorations. The intervention of defective restorations ranged from minimal intervention to total restoration replacement. The evaluation criteria were also varied with different evaluation protocols. The low number and heterogeneity of RCTs did not allow for meta-analyses. Conclusions: Although different repair protocols are mentioned in the literature according to the included studies, an appropriate and definitive conclusion can't be drawn. However, it seems repairs versus replacements should be considered as the first line of treatment when all factors lead to repair rather than replacement. Further randomized controlled trials with high methodological quality need to be conducted in order to establish evidence-based recommendations, particularly for RBC repair.

scholarly journals Effects of rapid maxillary expansion on temporomandibular joints:

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 442-456
Author(s):  
Darlyane Torres ◽  
Jéssica Lopes ◽  
Marcela Baraúna Magno ◽  
Lucianne Cople Maia ◽  
David Normando ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Joint Space ◽  
Rapid Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Articular Disc ◽  
Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Moderate Risk ◽  
Condylar Position ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the impact of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) on the condylar position, disc joint, joint space, and interarticular relationship in growing patients. Materials and Methods A systematic search was performed in nine databases. The clinical studies selected included those with pre- and post-magnetic resonance, conventional computed tomography or cone beam tomography in growing patients. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for controlled clinical studies and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Quality Assessment for Before-After Studies With No Control Group. Results Initially, 4303 records were identified. Only eight studies fulfilled the criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis. Of those, two were controlled clinical studies with a risk of uncertain to high bias. The remaining papers had a low to moderate risk of bias. Results showed that RME in children and adolescents promoted the following: remodeling in the head and or condylar branch, changes in condylar position and joint space, maintenance of improved symmetry between the condyles, and no ability to modify the position or shape of the articular disc. Conclusions RME in growing patients is able, in the short term, to modify the condyle-fossa relationship but does not change the position or shape of the articular disc. The intercondylar symmetric relationship is maintained or improved. Although the NHLBI score shows low to moderate risk of bias, the clinical relevance of these review findings is limited by Cochrane and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation scores.

scholarly journals Evaluation of occlusal factors in patients with temporomandibular joint disorder

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 61-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Dória Costa ◽  
Gontran da Rocha Torres Froes Junior ◽  
Carlos Neanes Santos
Keyword(s):  
Temporomandibular Joint ◽  
Temporomandibular Disorder ◽  
Open Bite ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Temporomandibular Joint Disorder ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Posterior Crossbite ◽  
Asymptomatic Volunteers ◽  
Anterior Guidance ◽  
Joint Disorder

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and the relation between the main occlusal factors and the temporomandibular disorder (TMD). METHODS: We analyzed 100 patients (50 diagnosed with TMD and 50 asymptomatic volunteers, control group) through a questionnaire that classified TMD as absent, mild, moderate and severe. Then, an evaluation was made of intraoral occlusal factors: Absence of posterior teeth, wear facets, overjet, overbite, open bite, posterior crossbite, sagittal relationship (Class I, II and III), centric relation discrepancy for maximum intercuspation, anterior guidance and balancing occlusal interference. The c² examined the association between TMD and considered occlusal variables. RESULTS: The prevalence of studied occlusal factors was higher in patients with moderate and severe TMD. Statistically significant results were found on: Absence of five or more posterior teeth, overbite and overjet greater than 5 mm, edge-to-edge bite, posterior crossbite, Class II and III, the absence of effective anterior guide and balancing side interferences. CONCLUSIONS: Indeed, it is concluded that there is a relationship between TMD and occlusal factors, however it can not be told to what extent these factors are predisposing, precipitating or perpetuating the disease. Therefore, despite its multifactorial etiology, one can not neglect the occlusal analysis of these patients.

scholarly journals Impacto da Tecnologia Assistiva em indivíduos com Dislexia: uma Revisão Sistemática

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliezer Magno Araújo ◽  
Raúl Teves ◽  
Roberto Machado ◽  
Rui Rofino
Keyword(s):  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Bias Assessment

Esta revisão sistemática teve por objetivo verificar do impacto das diferentes formas de Tecnologia Assistiva existentes na reabilitação de indivíduos com Dislexia. Foram seguidas as orientações PRISMA para definição dos critérios de inclusão e exclusão dos artigos. Tais artigos foram selecionados através das seguintes bases de dados: B-on, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Science.gov, CORE, ScienceDirect e Taylor & Francis. O risco de viés foi avaliado através do “Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool”. A combinação das amostras de todos os estudos incluiu um total de 344 participantes com dislexia, dos quais 323 participantes são crianças e adolescentes, e 21 são jovens adultos e adultos. Verificou-se que a maior parte dos estudos evidenciam um impacto positivo da TA ao nível da leitura. Considera-se que a presente revisão fornece um apanhado das investigações e softwares mais recentes no âmbito da reabilitação com TA e constitui um testemunho fundamentado que poderá consciencializar os profissionais em relação aos benefícios do uso da tecnologia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document