Parents' Views on Silver Diamine Fluoride to Manage Early Childhood Caries.

BACKGROUND: The use of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) as a nonsurgical caries management product is growing. Evidence suggests that SDF is very successful in arresting caries. However, a common concern with SDF treatment is the unaesthetic black staining. The purpose of this qualitative study was to determine parents' views following their children's treatment with SDF to manage severe early childhood caries (ECC). METHOD: Parents were interviewed as part of a mixed-method study of SDF to arrest severe ECC. Children with caries lesions in primary teeth were treated with 2 applications of 38% SDF, followed by fluoride varnish. Semistructured in-person and phone interviews were conducted with 19 parents of children in the study. Data were transcribed verbatim and manually coded and uploaded to NVivo 12 for further coding analysis. RESULTS: None of the parents had previously heard about SDF, and they learned about it from the study dentist. Although parents trusted the dentist's information on SDF, they welcomed additional evidence, especially relating to product safety and effectiveness. Some parents were minimally concerned with the black staining caused by SDF treatment. It was more important that SDF arrested caries progression, minimized pain and sensitivity, and prevented dental infection. However, some parents expressed concerns related to the unaesthetic black staining. Interestingly, many parents indicated that their children were not overly concerned with the black staining. A majority of parents said that they would recommend the treatment to others. CONCLUSION: This is the first qualitative study involving parents of children who were treated with SDF. Most parents were accepting of SDF as a nonsurgical treatment to arrest caries and minimize dentinal sensitivity secondary to caries, although some expressed concern about the black staining in anterior teeth. It is important to adequately inform parents of the negative aesthetic consequences and obtain informed consent before treatment. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: This qualitative study revealed that many parents of children with severe ECC are accepting of SDF as a nonrestorative caries management option, despite the black staining of caries lesions. Dental professionals need to be aware of these parental concerns and obtain written informed consent prior to treatment. Parents also requested more information and resources on SDF on its benefits, effectiveness, and any associated risks.

Force platform feedback for standing balance training after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Standing balance deficits are common in individuals after stroke. One way to address these deficits is to provide the individual with feedback from a force platform while balance activities are performed. The feedback can take visual and/or auditory form. OBJECTIVES: To determine if visual or auditory force platform feedback improves the clinical and force platform standing balance outcomes in clients with stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched December 2003), and the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2003), EMBASE (1974 to May 2003), CINAHL (1982 to May 2003), PEDro (May 2003), CIRRIE (May 2003) and REHABDATA (May 2003). Reference lists of articles were reviewed and manufacturers of equipment were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing force platform with visual feedback and/or auditory feedback to other balance treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trials for inclusion, methodological quality, and data extraction. Trials were combined for meta-analysis according to outcome and type of feedback. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials (246 participants). Force platform feedback did not improve clinical measures of balance when moving or walking (Berg Balance Scale and Timed Up and Go). Significant improvements in laboratory force platform indicators of stance symmetry were found for regimens using visual feedback (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.31 to -0.04, p = 0.04) and the concurrent visual and auditory feedback (weighted mean difference (WMD) -4.02, 95% CI -5.99 to -2.04, p = 0.00007). There were no significant effects on laboratory postural sway indicators, clinical outcomes or measures of function at follow-up assessment. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Force platform feedback (visual or auditory) improved stance symmetry but not sway in standing, clinical balance outcomes or measures of independence.

Hepatitis B vaccination for patients with chronic renal failure.

BACKGROUND: Chronic renal failure patients are at particular risk of hepatitis B virus infection. Early studies have demonstrated that renal failure patients benefit from vaccination; however, not all studies have consistently shown benefit. OBJECTIVES: To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of hepatitis B vaccine and of a reinforced vaccination series in chronic renal failure patients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Renal Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register on The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2002),PubMed/MEDLINE (1966 to July 2003), EMBASE (1985 to November 2003), Current Clinical Practice Guidelines (Canadian Immunization Guide and Vaccine Preventable Diseases Surveillance Manual), and Science Citation Index as well as journals, published abstracts, and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials comparing plasma vaccine with placebo, recombinant vaccine with placebo, recombinant vaccine with plasma vaccine, and a reinforced vaccination series (ie, more than three inoculations) with three inoculations of vaccine in chronic renal failure patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcome measures included incidence of patients developing hepatitis B virus antibodies and infections while secondary outcomes included adverse events, liver-related morbidity, and mortality. Random effects models were used and reported relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (RR and 95% CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included seven randomised clinical trials. None of them had high quality. Plasma vaccine was significantly more effective than placebo in achieving hepatitis B antibodies (RR 23.0, 95% CI 14.39 to 36.76, 3 trials). We found no statistically significant difference between plasma vaccine or placebo regarding hepatitis B virus infections (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.24). We found no statistically significant differences between recombinant vaccine and plasma vaccine in achieving hepatitis B antibodies (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.53, 2 trials). Heterogeneity was significant and appeared to be attributable to the dose of vaccine. Two trials examined a reinforced recombinant vaccine strategy, which was not statistically more effective than three inoculations of recombinant vaccine regarding development of hepatitis B antibodies (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.16). REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Plasma derived vaccines are more effective than placebo in achieving hepatitis B antibodies, while no statistically significant difference was found between recombinant and plasma vaccines. No statistically significant difference of effectiveness was observed between a reinforced vaccination series versus routine vaccinations of three inoculations of recombinant vaccine.