RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To compare the clinical effectiveness of ion-releasing restorations (IRR) vs. composite resin (CR) in dental restorations. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out from articles published until January 2024, in the biomedical databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scielo, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Randomized clinical trials were included, with a follow-up time greater than or equal to 1 year, without time and language limits and which reported the clinical effect of IRR compared to CR in dental restorations. The RoB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies and the GRADEPro GDT tool was used to assess the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation of the results. RESULTS: The search yielded a total of 1109 articles. After excluding those that did not meet the selection criteria, 29 articles remained for the quantitative synthesis. The analysis found no statistically significant difference when comparing the dental restorations with IRRs or CRs. CONCLUSION: The literature reviewed suggests that there are no differences between the IRRs and CRs in dental restorations.
RESUMEN
Background: To compare the effect of conventional brackets and self-ligating brackets on periodontal health. Material and Methods: A search of information up to October 2022 was carried out in the following electronic databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), EMBASE, SciELO and Google Scholar. We included studies that were randomised clinical trials, dealing with conventional brackets and self-ligating brackets and their effect on periodontal health, with no language restriction and no time limit. The Risk of Bias 2 (Rob 2.0) tool was used to determine the risk of bias of the included studies. The information selected from the studies was entered and analysed with RevMan 5.3, using the mean and standard deviation with a 95% confidence interval as a measure. Finally, an analysis was performed using the GRADE system to classify the quality of the evidence and grade the strength of the recommendation. Results: The preliminary search yielded a total of 399 articles, discarding those that did not meet the selection criteria, leaving only 13 articles. The effect of conventional and self-ligating brackets on periodontal health was determined using periodontal probing depth (PPD), plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI) and bleeding index (BI), showing advantages of self-ligating brackets in PI and BI, and no differences compared to self-ligating brackets in PPD and GI. Conclusions: Self-ligating brackets probably better preserve periodontal health compared to conventional brackets regarding plaque accumulation and bleeding on probing. Key words:Conventional brackets, self-ligating brackets, periodontal health, orthodontic treatment, systematic review, meta-analysis.
RESUMEN
The National Institute of Health has, for the first time, identified National Priorities for Oral Health Research, this process was carried out by the Subdirectorate of Research and Laboratories of Noncommunicable Diseases of the National Center for Public Health with the technical advice of the Directorate of Research and Innovation in Health and in coordination with the Executive Directorate of Oral Health of the General Directorate of Strategic Interventions in Public Health of the Ministry of Health, using a participatory methodology with three key actors: researchers/specialists, experts and decision-makers. This article aims to describe the process used to identify these priorities, which consisted of five phases: i) identification of the strategic objectives of the Ministry of Health, ii) identification of needs in oral health research, iii) review by experts and assessment of needs according to criteria and v) presentation of the priorities. As a result, 12 priorities were obtained, which were subsequently approved by Ministerial Resolution No. 262-2022/MINSA, for a period of 2022-2026. In addition, we provide recommendations for future processes.
El Instituto Nacional de Salud, ha llevado a cabo por primera vez el proceso de identificación de Prioridades Nacionales de Investigación en Salud Bucal a cargo de la Subdirección de Investigación y Laboratorios de Enfermedades No Transmisibles del Centro Nacional de Salud Pública con la asesoría técnica de la Dirección de Investigación e Innovación en Salud y en coordinación con la Dirección Ejecutiva de Salud Bucal de la Dirección General de Intervenciones Estratégicas en Salud Pública del Ministerio de Salud mediante metodología participativa de tres actores claves: investigadores/especialistas, expertos y decisores. El objetivo de este artículo es describir el proceso seguido para la identificación de estas prioridades, el cual comprendió cinco fases: i) identificación de objetivos estratégicos del MINSA, ii) identificación de necesidades de investigación en salud bucal, iii) revisión por expertos y valoración de las necesidades según criterios, iv) priorización (valoración de la lista de prioridades según calificación) y v) presentación de las prioridades. Como resultado se obtuvieron las 12 prioridades que posteriormente fueron aprobadas por Resolución Ministerial N.° 262-2022/MINSA, con un periodo de vigencia 2022-2026. Además, se brindaron recomendaciones para futuros procesos.
Asunto(s)
Salud Bucal , Salud Pública , PerúRESUMEN
El Instituto Nacional de Salud, ha llevado a cabo por primera vez el proceso de identificación de Prioridades Nacionales de Investigación en Salud Bucal a cargo de la Subdirección de Investigación y Laboratorios de Enfermedades No Transmisibles del Centro Nacional de Salud Pública con la asesoría técnica de la Dirección de Investigación e Innovación en Salud y en coordinación con la Dirección Ejecutiva de Salud Bucal de la Dirección General de Intervenciones Estratégicas en Salud Pública del Ministerio de Salud mediante metodología participativa de tres actores claves: investigadores/especialistas, expertos y decisores. El objetivo de este artículo es describir el proceso seguido para la identificación de estas prioridades, el cual comprendió cinco fases: i) identificación de objetivos estratégicos del MINSA, ii) identificación de necesidades de investigación en salud bucal, iii) revisión por expertos y valoración de las necesidades según criterios, iv) priorización (valoración de la lista de prioridades según calificación) y v) presentación de las prioridades. Como resultado se obtuvieron las 12 prioridades que posteriormente fueron aprobadas por Resolución Ministerial N.° 262-2022/MINSA, con un periodo de vigencia 2022-2026. Además, se brindaron recomendaciones para futuros procesos.
The National Institute of Health has, for the first time, identified National Priorities for Oral Health Research, this process was carried out by the Subdirectorate of Research and Laboratories of Noncommunicable Diseases of the National Center for Public Health with the technical advice of the Directorate of Research and Innovation in Health and in coordination with the Executive Directorate of Oral Health of the General Directorate of Strategic Interventions in Public Health of the Ministry of Health, using a participatory methodology with three key actors: researchers/specialists, experts and decision-makers. This article aims to describe the process used to identify these priorities, which consisted of five phases: i) identification of the strategic objectives of the Ministry of Health, ii) identification of needs in oral health research, iii) review by experts and assessment of needs according to criteria and v) presentation of the priorities. As a result, 12 priorities were obtained, which were subsequently approved by Ministerial Resolution No. 262-2022/MINSA, for a period of 2022-2026. In addition, we provide recommendations for future processes.
RESUMEN
Objetivo. Determinar la destreza manual del agarre del cepillo dental para la remoción de placa dental en personas con habilidades diferentes según edad, sexo. Material y métodos. La muestra estuvo comprendida de 28 estudiantes que asistían al centro Ann Sullivan del Perú-CASP (16 con autismo y 12 con síndrome de Down) entre 11 a 26 años de edad. Se determinó el índice de placa de Silness y Lõe (IIP) antes y después del cepillado.Los datos fueron analizados usando el CHI cuadrado y la Prueba Exacta de Fisher, para encontrar la diferencia de promedios de IIP antes y después del cepillado dental, tiempo en segundos y la técnica usada, se utilizó la prueba 't' previo Prueba de Normalidad K-S y Shapiro-Wilk. Resultados. Este estudio evidencia que la destreza manual del agarre del cepillo dental en pacientes con autismo fue distal oblicuo y mixto (más de un tipo de agarre) y en pacientes con síndrome de Down sólo mixto (más de un tipo de agarre). Conclusiones. La preferencia del agarre del cepillo dental en escolares con autismo fue distal oblicuo y mixto (más de un tipo de agarre) y en escolares con síndrome de Down sólo mixto (más de un tipo de agarre).
Objective. To determine the manual skill of the toothbrushing grips for dental plaque removal in people with different skills according to age, sex. Material and methods. The study sample consisted of 28 students who attended 'Centro Ann Sullivan del Perú' (16 with autism and 12 with Down's syndrome) between 11 to 26 years old. We determined an initial Silness & Lõe Plaque Index (PI), then we recorded the grip type with a video camera and after that we determined a final PI after tooth brushing. Subsequently, the grip type, laterality, time and tooth brushing technique employed were noted. The data were analyzed using the Chi square and Fisher's Exact Test and to find the PI average difference before and after tooth brushing, time in seconds and tooth brushing techniques was used T-test after Normality test (K-S and Shapiro-Wilk). Results. This study shows that manual dexterity grip of the toothbrush in students with autism was distal oblique and mixed (more than one type of grip) and in students with Down syndrome only mixed (more than one type of grip). Conclusions. Toothbrush grip preference in students with autism was distal oblique and mixed (more than one type of grip) and in students with Down syndrome only mixed (more than one type of grip).