Background. The disinfection of orthodontic acrylic resins might change the physical and mechanicalproperties of these materials. We aimed to investigate the impact of four different commercially availabledisinfectants on the surface roughness of acrylic resins used for orthodontic appliances. Methods. Four disinfectant solutions (BirexSE, Opti-Cide3, COEfect MinuteSpray, and CaviCideSpray) were used to disinfect orthodontic acrylic resins using the spraying method. The resins weresubjected to repeated disinfection protocols. Distilled water, also applied via spraying method, was usedas a control. Surface roughness was scrutinized to examine the extent of surface topography changes bystylus profilometry. Data normality was evaluated via the Shapiro–Wilk test, followed by the WilcoxonSigned-Rank test for non-parametric data or paired Student’s t-test for parametric data to compareintra-group differences in roughness before and after the use of the disinfectant solutions. Results. Some of the disinfectants (BirexSE and CaviCide) resulted in significant changes in surfaceroughness values before and after the disinfection compared to the controls (P<0.05). The groups thatwere in contact with distilled water, Opti-Cide, and Coeffect did not exhibit significant differences insurface roughness before and after the intervention (P>0.05). However, from a clinical perspective, theresulting variations in surface roughness (<%0.15) induced by these solutions might not reflect clinicallysignificant differences. Conclusion. The use of disinfectant solutions is unlikely to harm the surface of orthodontic acrylic resins.Oral care providers need to be attentive to the interpretation and implementation of clinically significantchanges in their evidence-based approach regarding potential material damages by disinfection sprays.
A bstract Objective This review aims to identify variances and research gaps in the early childhood caries (ECC) prevalence within countries and the global community by mapping current evidence. Materials and methods We performed a literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science to identify English-language, peer-reviewed epidemiologic studies published from January 1999 to January 2019. Abstracts and full-text articles were dual-screened based on predefined eligibility criteria. We classified outcomes by children's age and countries based on economic status. Ranges of reported caries prevalence and median values by country and age were calculated and evidence-mapped. Results Out of 915 studies, 59 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most significant number of reports were from the USA, Brazil, and India. The ranges of prevalence (1–96%) among the studies were large. The calculated median caries prevalence values may better estimate countries’ prevalence than the reported ranges. Early childhood caries prevalence's highest median values were found for South Korea studies (54%) for children <3-year-old and from Bosnia (81%) for children 3–6 years old. No apparent difference was found in the prevalence of ECC from developed and developing countries. Conclusion This mapping review reflects the ranges and median values of ECC worldwide. Overall, the reported prevalence of ECC in most countries is very high. No apparent difference was found in the prevalence of ECC from developed and developing countries. Reported ranges of ECC, as well as heterogeneity and methodological issues, hamper comparisons across studies globally. Clinical significance The global ECC prevalence ranges are extreme. Median data may provide a structure for future epidemiological studies to optimizing healthcare resources for caries interventions globally. How to cite this article Abdelrahaman M, Hsu K-L, Melo MA, et al. Mapping Evidence on Early Childhood Caries Prevalence: Complexity of Worldwide Data Reporting. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(1):1–7.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.