Efficacy of American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry Best Practice Recommendations for Diagnosis and Management of Deep Caries in Primary Teeth.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD) best practice recommendations for the diagnosis and management of deep carious lesions in primary teeth. Methods: Primary molars from four to eight-year-old children were selected for diagnosis and treatment planning independently by a pediatric dental resident using the AAPD recommendations and a pediatric dentist using his clinical expertise and experience. The analysis of the two evaluators was performed for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive values, and agreement scores. Results: A total of 365 primary molars from 185 children were used. Diagnosis and treatment planning by the resident demonstrated a higher sensitivity score of 92.7 percent (95 percent confidence interval [95% CI]=80.1 to 98.5) and specificity score of 96.6 percent (95% CI=94 to 98.3) for treatment planning compared to a diagnosis having sensitivity and specificity scores of 74 percent (95% CI=59.7 to 85.4) and 89.8 percent (95% CI=86 to 92.9), respectively. Lower agreement scores between the resident and the pediatric dentist were found for the diagnosis of asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis and the use of lesion sterilization and tissue repair as a treatment modality. Conclusions: The AAPD best practice recommendations showed a better consistency for treatment planning than the diagnosis of carious primary molars.

Quality analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for management of impacted maxillary central incisors: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for management of impacted central incisors. METHODS: Search was performed in PubMed, LILACS, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, and guideline-focused databases/repositories on 15-09-2022 without any limitations and was updated on 15-07-2023. Grey literature search was also performed. Two independent reviewers were involved in the study selection and data extraction. Quality assessment of the included CPG was performed by four independent appraisers using the AGREE-II instrument. The degree of agreement among the appraisers was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Five CPG were included in the review. The Ministry of Health, Malaysia (MHM) guideline obtained the highest scores in all six domains of AGREE-II and an overall score of 73% demonstrating the "highest" quality. The remaining four guidelines obtained overall "low-quality" scores ranging from 34.57-37.52%. The ICC scores ranged from 0.530 to 0.990 for various domains of AGREE-II. CONCLUSION: MHM guidelines demonstrated high-quality scores in domains of 'scope and purpose', 'clarity of presentation', 'applicability domain', and 'editorial independence', while others were found to have moderate or low quality. This review identified areas that can be addressed by future guideline developers to avoid these discrepancies.