With a questionnaire addressed to general dental practitioners in Sweden, the Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care launched a project group in 1999 to systematically review and evaluate the existing literature on various caries preventive methods. The aim of this article was to report findings concerning the caries preventive effect of fluoride toothpastes in various age groups, with special emphasis on fluoride concentration and supervised versus non-supervised brushing. A systematic search in electronic databases for articles published between 1966 and April 2003 was conducted with the inclusion criteria of a randomized or controlled clinical trial, at least 2 years follow-up and caries increment in the permanent (deltaDMFS/T) or primary (deltadmfs/t) dentition as endpoint. Out of 905 articles originally identified, 54 met the inclusion criteria. These studies were assessed independently by at least two reviewers and scored A-C according to predetermined criteria for methodology and performance. The measure of effect was the prevented fraction (PF), expressed as percent. The results revealed strong evidence (level 1) (i) for the caries preventive effect of daily use of fluoride toothpaste compared to placebo in the young permanent dentition (PF 24.9%), (ii) that toothpastes with 1,500 ppm of fluoride had a superior preventive effect compared with standard dentifrices with 1,000 ppm F in the young permanent dentition (PF 9.7%), and (iii) that higher caries reductions were recorded in studies with supervised toothbrushing compared with non-supervised (PF 23.3%). However, incomplete evidence (level 4) was found regarding the effect of fluoride toothpaste in the primary dentition. In conclusion, this review reinforced the importance of daily toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpastes for preventing dental caries, although long-term studies in age groups other than children and adolescents are still lacking.

BackgroundCost-of-illness (COI) studies of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) are vital components for describing the economic burden of MS, and are frequently used in model studies of interventions of MS. We conducted a systematic review of studies estimating the COI of MS, to compare costs between studies and examine cost drivers, emphasizing generalizability and methodological choices.Material and methodA literature search on studies published in English on COI of MS was performed in PubMed for the period January 1969 to January 2014, resulting in 1,326 publications. A mapping of studies using a bottom-up approach or top-down approach, respectively, was conducted for the 48 studies assessed as relevant. In a second analysis, the cost estimates were compared between the 29 studies that used a societal perspective on costs, human capital approach for indirect costs, presenting number of patients included, time-period studied, and year of price level used.ResultsThe mapping showed that bottom-up studies and prevalence approaches were most common. The cost ratios between different severity levels within studies were relatively stable, to the ratio of 1 to 2 to 3 for disability level categories. Drugs were the main cost drivers for MS-patients with low disease severity, representing 29% to 82% of all costs in this patient group, while the main cost components for groups with more advanced MS symptoms were production losses due to MS and informal care, together representing 17% to 67% of costs in those groups.ConclusionThe bottom-up method and prevalence approach dominated in studies of COI of MS. Our findings show that there are difficulties in comparing absolute costs across studies, nevertheless, the relative costs expressed as cost ratios, comparing different severity levels, showed higher resemblance. Costs of drugs were main cost drivers for less severe MS and informal care and production losses for the most severe MS.

No abstract

The objectives of this study were to evaluate systematically the evidence of the caries-preventive effect of fissure sealing of occlusal tooth surfaces and to examine factors potentially modifying the effect. The search strategies included electronic databases, reference lists of articles, and selected textbooks. Inclusion criteria were randomized or quasi-randomized clinical trials or controlled clinical trials comparing fissure sealing with no treatment or another preventive treatment in children up to 14 years of age at the start; the outcome measure was caries increment; the diagnostic criteria had been described; and the follow-up time was at least 2 years. Inclusion decisions were taken and grading of the studies was done independently by two of the authors. The main measure of effect was relative risk reduction. Thirteen studies using resin-based or glass ionomer sealant materials were included in the final analysis. The results showed that most studies were performed during the 1970s and a single application had been utilized. The relative caries risk reduction pooled estimate of resin-based sealants on permanent 1st molars was 33% (relative risk = 0.67; CI = 0.55-0.83). The effect depended on retention of the sealant. In conclusion, the review suggests limited evidence that fissure sealing of 1st permanent molars with resin-based materials has a caries-preventive effect. The evidence is incomplete for permanent 2nd molars, premolars and primary molars and for glass ionomer cements. Overall, there remains a need for further trials of high quality, particularly in child populations with a low and a high caries risk, respectively.

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyse the efficacy of multidisciplinary interventions on return to work for people on sick leave due to low back pain. Methods: A systematic review of published studies was performed, including a meta-analysis. Identified publications were assessed for relevance and study quality. Results: A meta-analysis based on 5 studies from Scandinavia verified the scientific evidence for the efficacy of multidisciplinary interventions on return to work. Conclusion: Although long-term sick leave due to low back pain represents a large problem for the community and multidisciplinary interventions are often advocated, surprisingly few published studies have return to work as an outcome. There is evidence for a clinically relevant effect of multidisciplinary interventions on return to work.