Methodological quality of systematic reviews analyzing the use of laser therapy in restorative dentistry

被引:15
|
作者
Salmos, Janaina [1 ,2 ]
Gerbi, Marleny E. M. M. [1 ,3 ]
Braz, Rodivan [2 ]
Andrade, Emanuel S. S. [3 ]
Vasconcelos, Belmiro C. E. [3 ]
Bessa-Nogueira, Ricardo V. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Pernambuco, Ctr Laser Therapy, Sch Dent, BR-54753020 Camaragibe, PE, Brazil
[2] Univ Fed Pernambuco, Dept Restorat Dent, Sch Dent, Recife, PE, Brazil
[3] Univ Fed Pernambuco, Dept Oral Med, Sch Dent, Recife, PE, Brazil
关键词
Review; Lasers; Operative dentistry; Dental caries/diagnosis; ER-YAG LASER; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FLUORESCENCE DEVICE; OCCLUSAL CARIES; DIODE-LASER; IRRADIATION; PERFORMANCE; PREVENTION; ARTICLE; GUIDES;
D O I
10.1007/s10103-009-0733-9
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study was to identify systematic reviews (SRs) that compared laser with other dental restorative procedures and to evaluate their methodological quality. A search strategy was developed and implemented for MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, LILACS, and the Brazilian Dentistry Bibliography (1966-2007). Inclusion criteria were: the article had to be an SR (+/- A meta-analysis); primary focus was the use of laser in restorative dentistry; published in English, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, German. Two investigators independently selected and evaluated the SRs. The overview quality assessment questionnaire (OQAQ) was used to evaluate methodological quality, and the results were averaged. There were 145 references identified, of which seven were SRs that met the inclusion criteria (kappa = 0.81). Of the SRs, 71.4% appraised lasers in dental caries diagnosis. The mean overall OQAQ score was 4.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4-6.5]. Of the SRs, 57.1% had major flaws, scoring a parts per thousand currency sign4. SR methodological quality is low; therefore, clinicians should critically appraise them prior to considering their recommendations to guide patient care.
引用
收藏
页码:127 / 136
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Replication of systematic reviews: is it to the benefit or detriment of methodological quality?
    Chapelle, Celine
    Ollier, Edouard
    Bonjean, Paul
    Locher, Clara
    Zufferey, Paul Jacques
    Cucherat, Michel
    Laporte, Silvy
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2023, 162 : 98 - 106
  • [22] Construction of a scale to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews
    Costa, Angelo Brandelli
    Couto Zoltowski, Ana Paula
    Koller, Silvia Helena
    Pereira Teixeira, Marco Antonio
    CIENCIA & SAUDE COLETIVA, 2015, 20 (08): : 2441 - 2452
  • [23] Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement
    Marcin Kowalczuk
    John Adamich
    Nicole Simunovic
    Forough Farrokhyar
    Olufemi R. Ayeni
    Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2015, 23 : 2583 - 2589
  • [24] Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement
    Kowalczuk, Marcin
    Adamich, John
    Simunovic, Nicole
    Farrokhyar, Forough
    Ayeni, Olufemi R.
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2015, 23 (09) : 2583 - 2589
  • [25] Protocol registration improves reporting quality of systematic reviews in dentistry
    dos Santos, Mateus Bertolini Fernandes
    Agostini, Bernardo Antonio
    Bassani, Rafaela
    Pereira, Gabriel Kalil Rocha
    Sarkis-Onofre, Rafael
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [26] Protocol registration improves reporting quality of systematic reviews in dentistry
    Mateus Bertolini Fernandes dos Santos
    Bernardo Antônio Agostini
    Rafaela Bassani
    Gabriel Kalil Rocha Pereira
    Rafael Sarkis-Onofre
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 20
  • [27] Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews of Intraoperative Neuromonitoring in Thyroidectomy: A Systematic Review
    Sanabria, Alvaro
    Kowalski, Luiz P.
    Nixon, Iain
    Angelos, Peter
    Shaha, Ashok
    Owen, Randall P.
    Suarez, Carlos
    Rinaldo, Alessandra
    Ferlito, Alfio
    Agaimy, Abbas
    Amrosch, Petra
    Andreasen, Simon
    Angelos, Peter
    Back, Leif
    Barnes, Leon
    Beitler, Jonathan J.
    Bernal-Sprekelsen, Manuel
    Bishop, Justin A.
    Boedeker, Carsten C.
    Bossi, Paolo
    Braakhuis, Boudewijn J. M.
    Bradford, Carol R.
    Bradley, Patrick J.
    Brakenhoff, Ruud H.
    Brandwein-Gensler, Margaret S.
    Cabecadas, Jose
    Cardesa, Antonio
    Chera, Bhishamjit S.
    Civantos, Francisco J.
    Coca-Pelaz, Andres
    Corry, June
    Coskun, H. Hakan
    D'Cruz, Anil
    de Bree, Remco
    Devaney, Kenneth O.
    Eisbruch, Avraham
    Ferlito, Alfio
    Fernandez-Miranda, Juan C.
    Florek, Ewa
    Folz, Benedikt J.
    Forastiere, Arlene A.
    Genden, Eric M.
    Gnepp, Douglas R.
    Guntinas-Lichius, Orlando
    Haigentz, Missak, Jr.
    Halmos, Gyorgy B.
    Hamoir, Marc
    Hanna, Ehab Y.
    Hartl, Dana M.
    Hellquist, Henrik
    JAMA OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, 2019, 145 (06) : 563 - 573
  • [28] Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews in radiation oncology: A systematic review
    Hasan, Haroon
    Muhammed, Taaha
    Yu, Jennifer
    Taguchi, Kelsi
    Samargandi, Osama A.
    Howard, A. Fuchsia
    Lo, Andrea C.
    Olson, Robert
    Goddard, Karen
    CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2017, 50 : 141 - 149
  • [29] Assessing the methodological quality and risk of bias of systematic reviews: primer for authors of overviews of systematic reviews
    Lunny, Carole
    Kanji, Salmaan
    Thabet, Pierre
    Haidich, Anna-Bettina
    Bougioukas, Konstantinos, I
    Pieper, Dawid
    BMJ MEDICINE, 2024, 3 (01):
  • [30] Methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies: A survey of reviews of basic research
    Mignini L.E.
    Khan K.S.
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6 (1)