Efficacy of treatments used to relieve signs and symptoms associated with teething: a systematic review
Braz. oral res. (Online)
; 36: e066, 2022. tab, graf
Article
em En
|
LILACS-Express
| LILACS, BBO
| ID: biblio-1374751
Biblioteca responsável:
BR1.1
ABSTRACT
Abstract 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.
Texto completo:
1
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
BBO
/
LILACS
Tipo de estudo:
Clinical_trials
/
Diagnostic_studies
/
Risk_factors_studies
/
Systematic_reviews
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Braz. oral res. (Online)
Assunto da revista:
ODONTOLOGIA
Ano de publicação:
2022
Tipo de documento:
Article
País de afiliação:
Brasil
País de publicação:
Brasil