Assessing Google Searches for Toothache during COVID-19 Lockdowns.

Background: Lockdowns due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced many dental offices to be closed. This study aims to investigate the association between COVID-19 imposed lockdowns and online searches for toothache using Google Trends (GT). Methods: We investigated GT online searches for the term "toothache" within the past 5 years. The time frame for data gathering was considered as the initiation and end dates of national/regional lockdowns in each country. We used 1-way analysis of variance to identify statistical differences in relative search volumes (RSVs) between 2020 and 2016-2019 for each country. Results: Overall, 16 countries were included in our analyses. Among all countries, Indonesia (n = 100), Jamaica (n = 56), Philippines (n = 56), Iran (n = 52), and Turkey (47) had the highest RSVs for toothache in the specified period. Compared with the previous 4 years, higher RSVs were seen in the world (as a whole) (2020 RSVs, 94.4; vs 2019 RSVs, 77.8 [ P < 0.001]) and 13 countries (81.3% of the included countries). Conclusion: Generally, searching for the term "toothache" showed an increase during the COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020 compared with the past 4 years. This can imply the importance of dental care as urgent medical care during public health emergencies such as COVID-19.

The Impact of Micro RNA-320a Serum Level on Severity of Symptoms and Cerebral Processing of Pain in Patients with Fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work was to explore the expression of miR-320a level in fibromyalgia patients in comparison to healthy controls, and to clarify its impact on the severity of symptoms and the cerebral processing of pain assessed by middle latency somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs). DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Rheumatology and Neurology outpatient clinics. SUBJECTS: Seventy-four fibromyalgia patients and seventy-four normal healthy controls. METHODS: The included patients were subjected to detailed history taking, assessment of severity of fibromyalgia symptoms using the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Revised (FIQR), assessment of pain intensity using the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI), measurement of the serum level of miR-320a in addition to of measurement peak latencies and amplitudes of middle latency SSEPs. RESULTS: Fibromyalgia patients had significantly higher micro-RNA-320a levels (0.907 ± 0.022) in comparison to controls (0.874 ± 0.015) (P-value < .001). The mean values of micro-RNA-320a levels were significantly higher in fibromyalgia patients with insomnia, chronic fatigue syndrome, persistent depressive disorder, and primary headache disorder than those without (P-value = .024, <.001, .006, .036 respectively). There were statistically significant positive correlations between micro-RNA-320a levels, and disease duration, FIQR, and NPSI total scores (P-value <0.001, 0.003, 0.002 respectively). There were no statistically significant correlations between micro-RNA-320a levels and middle latency SSEPs. DISCUSSION: Micro-RNA-320a level is significantly upregulated in fibromyalgia patient. It has a crucial impact on the severity of symptoms but not related to the cerebral processing of pain.

Preprocedural mouth rinses for preventing transmission of infectious diseases through aerosols in dental healthcare providers.

BACKGROUND: Aerosols and spatter are generated in a dental clinic during aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) that use high-speed hand pieces. Dental healthcare providers can be at increased risk of transmission of diseases such as tuberculosis, measles and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) through droplets on mucosae, inhalation of aerosols or through fomites on mucosae, which harbour micro-organisms. There are ways to mitigate and contain spatter and aerosols that may, in turn, reduce any risk of disease transmission. In addition to personal protective equipment (PPE) and aerosol-reducing devices such as high-volume suction, it has been hypothesised that the use of mouth rinse by patients before dental procedures could reduce the microbial load of aerosols that are generated during dental AGPs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of preprocedural mouth rinses used in dental clinics to minimise incidence of infection in dental healthcare providers and reduce or neutralise contamination in aerosols. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 4 February 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials and excluded laboratory-based studies. Study participants were dental patients undergoing AGPs. Studies compared any preprocedural mouth rinse used to reduce contaminated aerosols versus placebo, no mouth rinse or another mouth rinse. Our primary outcome was incidence of infection of dental healthcare providers and secondary outcomes were reduction in the level of contamination of the dental operatory environment, cost, change in mouth microbiota, adverse events, and acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened search results, extracted data from included studies, assessed the risk of bias in the studies and judged the certainty of the available evidence. We used mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as the effect estimate for continuous outcomes, and random-effects meta-analysis to combine data  MAIN RESULTS:  We included 17 studies with 830 participants aged 18 to 70 years. We judged three trials at high risk of bias, two at low risk and 12 at unclear risk of bias.  None of the studies measured our primary outcome of the incidence of infection in dental healthcare providers.  The primary outcome in the studies was reduction in the level of bacterial contamination measured in colony-forming units (CFUs) at distances of less than 2 m (intended to capture larger droplets) and 2 m or more (to capture droplet nuclei from aerosols arising from the participant's oral cavity). It is unclear what size of CFU reduction represents a clinically significant amount. There is low- to very low-certainty evidence that chlorhexidine (CHX) may reduce bacterial contamination, as measured by CFUs, compared with no rinsing or rinsing with water. There were similar results when comparing cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) with no rinsing and when comparing CPC, essential oils/herbal mouthwashes or boric acid with water. There is very low-certainty evidence that tempered mouth rinses may provide a greater reduction in CFUs than cold mouth rinses. There is low-certainty evidence that CHX may reduce CFUs more than essential oils/herbal mouthwashes. The evidence for other head-to-head comparisons was limited and inconsistent.  The studies did not provide any information on costs, change in micro-organisms in the patient's mouth or adverse events such as temporary discolouration, altered taste, allergic reaction or hypersensitivity. The studies did not assess acceptability of the intervention to patients or feasibility of implementation for dentists.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: None of the included studies measured the incidence of infection among dental healthcare providers. The studies measured only reduction in level of bacterial contamination in aerosols. None of the studies evaluated viral or fungal contamination. We have only low to very low certainty for all findings. We are unable to draw conclusions regarding whether there is a role for preprocedural mouth rinses in reducing infection risk or the possible superiority of one preprocedural rinse over another. Studies are needed that measure the effect of rinses on infectious disease risk among dental healthcare providers and on contaminated aerosols at larger distances with standardised outcome measurement.

Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases.

BACKGROUND: Many dental procedures produce aerosols (droplets, droplet nuclei and splatter) that harbour various pathogenic micro-organisms and may pose a risk for the spread of infections between dentist and patient. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to greater concern about this risk. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of methods used during dental treatment procedures to minimize aerosol production and reduce or neutralize contamination in aerosols. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases on 17 September 2020: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (in the Cochrane Library, 2020, Issue 8), MEDLINE Ovid (from 1946); Embase Ovid (from 1980); the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease; the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov); and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) on aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) performed by dental healthcare providers that evaluated methods to reduce contaminated aerosols in dental clinics (excluding preprocedural mouthrinses). The primary outcomes were incidence of infection in dental staff or patients, and reduction in volume and level of contaminated aerosols in the operative environment. The secondary outcomes were cost, accessibility and feasibility. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened search results, extracted data from the included studies, assessed the risk of bias in the studies, and judged the certainty of the available evidence. We used mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as the effect estimate for continuous outcomes, and random-effects meta-analysis to combine data. We assessed heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 studies with 425 participants aged 5 to 69 years. Eight studies had high risk of bias; eight had unclear risk of bias. No studies measured infection. All studies measured bacterial contamination using the surrogate outcome of colony-forming units (CFU). Two studies measured contamination per volume of air sampled at different distances from the patient's mouth, and 14 studies sampled particles on agar plates at specific distances from the patient's mouth. The results presented below should be interpreted with caution as the evidence is very low certainty due to heterogeneity, risk of bias, small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals. Moreover, we do not know the 'minimal clinically important difference' in CFU. High-volume evacuator Use of a high-volume evacuator (HVE) may reduce bacterial contamination in aerosols less than one foot (~ 30 cm) from a patient's mouth (MD -47.41, 95% CI -92.76 to -2.06; 3 RCTs, 122 participants (two studies had split-mouth design); very high heterogeneity I² = 95%), but not at longer distances (MD -1.00, -2.56 to 0.56; 1 RCT, 80 participants). One split-mouth RCT (six participants) found that HVE may not be more effective than conventional dental suction (saliva ejector or low-volume evacuator) at 40 cm (MD CFU -2.30, 95% CI -5.32 to 0.72) or 150 cm (MD -2.20, 95% CI -14.01 to 9.61). Dental isolation combination system One RCT (50 participants) found that there may be no difference in CFU between a combination system (Isolite) and a saliva ejector (low-volume evacuator) during AGPs (MD -0.31, 95% CI -0.82 to 0.20) or after AGPs (MD -0.35, -0.99 to 0.29). However, an 'n of 1' design study showed that the combination system may reduce CFU compared with rubber dam plus HVE (MD -125.20, 95% CI -174.02 to -76.38) or HVE (MD -109.30, 95% CI -153.01 to -65.59). Rubber dam One split-mouth RCT (10 participants) receiving dental treatment, found that there may be a reduction in CFU with rubber dam at one-metre (MD -16.20, 95% CI -19.36 to -13.04) and two-metre distance (MD -11.70, 95% CI -15.82 to -7.58). One RCT of 47 dental students found use of rubber dam may make no difference in CFU at the forehead (MD 0.98, 95% CI -0.73 to 2.70) and occipital region of the operator (MD 0.77, 95% CI -0.46 to 2.00). One split-mouth RCT (21 participants) found that rubber dam plus HVE may reduce CFU more than cotton roll plus HVE on the patient's chest (MD -251.00, 95% CI -267.95 to -234.05) and dental unit light (MD -12.70, 95% CI -12.85 to -12.55). Air cleaning systems One split-mouth CCT (two participants) used a local stand-alone air cleaning system (ACS), which may reduce aerosol contamination during cavity preparation (MD -66.70 CFU, 95% CI -120.15 to -13.25 per cubic metre) or ultrasonic scaling (MD -32.40, 95% CI - 51.55 to -13.25). Another CCT (50 participants) found that laminar flow in the dental clinic combined with a HEPA filter may reduce contamination approximately 76 cm from the floor (MD -483.56 CFU, 95% CI -550.02 to -417.10 per cubic feet per minute per patient) and 20 cm to 30 cm from the patient's mouth (MD -319.14 CFU, 95% CI - 385.60 to -252.68). Disinfectants ‒ antimicrobial coolants Two RCTs evaluated use of antimicrobial coolants during ultrasonic scaling. Compared with distilled water, coolant containing chlorhexidine (CHX), cinnamon extract coolant or povidone iodine may reduce CFU: CHX (MD -124.00, 95% CI -135.78 to -112.22; 20 participants), povidone iodine (MD -656.45, 95% CI -672.74 to -640.16; 40 participants), cinnamon (MD -644.55, 95% CI -668.70 to -620.40; 40 participants). CHX coolant may reduce CFU more than povidone iodine (MD -59.30, 95% CI -64.16 to -54.44; 20 participants), but not more than cinnamon extract (MD -11.90, 95% CI -35.88 to 12.08; 40 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no studies that evaluated disease transmission via aerosols in a dental setting; and no evidence about viral contamination in aerosols. All of the included studies measured bacterial contamination using colony-forming units. There appeared to be some benefit from the interventions evaluated but the available evidence is very low certainty so we are unable to draw reliable conclusions. We did not find any studies on methods such as ventilation, ionization, ozonisation, UV light and fogging. Studies are needed that measure contamination in aerosols, size distribution of aerosols and infection transmission risk for respiratory diseases such as COVID-19 in dental patients and staff.

Reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE).

BACKGROUND: Research priority setting with stakeholders can help direct the limited resources for health research toward priority areas of need. Ensuring transparency of the priority setting process can strengthen legitimacy and credibility for influencing the research agenda. This study aims to develop a reporting guideline for priority setting of health research. METHODS: We searched electronic databases and relevant websites for sources (frameworks, guidelines, or models for conducting, appraising, reporting or evaluating health research priority setting, and reviews (including systematic reviews)), and primary studies of research priority setting to July 2019. We inductively developed a list of reporting items and piloted the preliminary guideline with a diverse range of 30 priority setting studies from the records retrieved. RESULTS: From 21,556 records, we included 26 sources for the candidate REPRISE framework and 455 primary research studies. The REporting guideline for PRIority SEtting of health research (REPRISE) has 31 reporting items that cover 10 domains: context and scope, governance and team, framework for priority setting, stakeholders/participants, identification and collection of priorities, prioritization of research topics, output, evaluation and feedback, translation and implementation, and funding and conflict of interest. Each reporting item includes a descriptor and examples. CONCLUSIONS: The REPRISE guideline can facilitate comprehensive reporting of studies of research priority setting. Improved transparency in research priority setting may strengthen the acceptability and implementation of the research priorities identified, so that efforts and funding are invested in generating evidence that is of importance to all stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

WITHDRAWN: Hand and ultrasonic instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment of permanent teeth.

BACKGROUND: Endodontic treatment of root canals or root canal treatment is a frequently performed dental procedure and is carried out on teeth in which irreversible pulpitis has led to necrosis (death) of the dental pulp (nerve). Removal of the necrotic tissue remnants and cleaning and shaping of the root canal are important phases of root canal treatment. Treatment options include the use of hand and rotary instruments and methods using ultrasonic or sonic equipment. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this review were to determine the relative clinical effectiveness of hand instrumentation versus ultrasonic instrumentation alone or in conjunction with hand instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment of permanent teeth. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS. We searched the reference lists of relevant articles in an attempt to locate additional published and unpublished trials. No language restriction was applied. The last electronic search was conducted in December 2007. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials involving people over 18 years of age with single and multiple permanent teeth with a completely formed apex and with no evidence of internal resorption requiring root canal treatment were included. Patients undertaking re-treatment of a tooth were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Screening of eligible studies was conducted in duplicate and independently. Results were to be expressed as fixed-effect or random-effects models using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was to be investigated including both clinical and methodological factors. MAIN RESULTS: No eligible randomised controlled trials were identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review illustrates the current lack of published or ongoing randomised controlled trials and the unavailability of high level evidence, based on clinically relevant outcomes, for the effectiveness of ultrasonic instrumentation used alone or as an adjunct to hand instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment.Future randomised controlled trials might focus more closely on evaluating the effectiveness of combinations of these interventions with an emphasis on not only clinically relevant but also patient-centred outcomes.

Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research: who's listening?

The biomedical research complex has been estimated to consume almost a quarter of a trillion US dollars every year. Unfortunately, evidence suggests that a high proportion of this sum is avoidably wasted. In 2014, The Lancet published a series of five reviews showing how dividends from the investment in research might be increased from the relevance and priorities of the questions being asked, to how the research is designed, conducted, and reported. 17 recommendations were addressed to five main stakeholders-funders, regulators, journals, academic institutions, and researchers. This Review provides some initial observations on the possible effects of the Series, which seems to have provoked several important discussions and is on the agendas of several key players. Some examples of individual initiatives show ways to reduce waste and increase value in biomedical research. This momentum will probably move strongly across stakeholder groups, if collaborative relationships evolve between key players; further important work is needed to increase research value. A forthcoming meeting in Edinburgh, UK, will provide an initial forum within which to foster the collaboration needed.

Resorbable versus titanium plates for orthognathic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recognition of some of the limitations of titanium plates and screws used for the fixation of bones has led to the development of plates manufactured from bioresorbable materials. Whilst resorbable plates appear to offer clinical advantages over metal plates in orthognathic surgery, concerns remain about the stability of fixation and the length of time required for their degradation and the possibility of foreign body reactions. This review compares the use of titanium versus bioresorbable plates in orthognathic surgery and is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2007. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of bioresorbable fixation systems with titanium systems used during orthognathic surgery. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 20 January 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library (searched 20 January 2017); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 20 January 2017); and Embase Ovid (1980 to 20 January 2017). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov; searched 20 January 2017), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (searched 20 January 2017) for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing bioresorbable versus titanium fixation systems used for orthognathic surgery in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the results of the electronic searches, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We resolved disagreement by discussion. Clinical heterogeneity between the included trials precluded pooling of data, and only a descriptive summary is presented. MAIN RESULTS: This review included two trials, involving 103 participants, one comparing titanium with resorbable plates and screws and the other titanium with resorbable screws. Both studies were at high risk of bias and provided very limited data for the primary outcomes of this review. All participants in one trial suffered mild to moderate postoperative discomfort with no statistically significant difference between the two plating groups at different follow-up times. Mean scores of patient satisfaction were 7.43 to 8.63 (range 0 to 10) with no statistically significant difference between the two groups throughout follow-up. Adverse effects reported in one study were two plate exposures in each group occurring between the third and ninth months. Plate exposures occurred mainly in the posterior maxillary region, except for one titanium plate exposure in the mandibular premolar region. Known causes of infection were associated with loosened screws and wound dehiscence with no statistically significant difference in the infection rate between titanium (3/196), and resorbable (3/165) plates. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We do not have sufficient evidence to determine if titanium plates or resorbable plates are superior for fixation of bones after orthognathic surgery. This review provides insufficient evidence to show any difference in postoperative pain and discomfort, level of patient satisfaction, plate exposure or infection for plate and screw fixation using either titanium or resorbable materials.

Adhesively bonded versus non-bonded amalgam restorations for dental caries.

BACKGROUND: Dental caries (tooth decay) is one of the commonest diseases which afflicts mankind, and has been estimated to affect up to 80% of people in high-income countries. Caries adversely affects and progressively destroys the tissues of the tooth, including the dental pulp (nerve), leaving teeth unsightly, weakened and with impaired function. The treatment of lesions of dental caries, which are progressing through dentine and have caused the formation of a cavity, involves the provision of dental restorations (fillings). This review updates the previous version published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of adhesive bonding on the in-service performance and longevity of dental amalgam restorations. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 21 January 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 12), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 21 January 2016) and EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 21 January 2016). We also searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en) (both to 21 January 2016) for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing adhesively bonded versus traditional non-bonded amalgam restorations in conventional preparations utilising deliberate retention, in adults with permanent molar and premolar teeth suitable for Class I and II amalgam restorations only. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened papers, extracted trial details and assessed the risk of bias in the included study. MAIN RESULTS: One trial with 31 patients who received 113 restorations was included. At two years, 50 out of 53 restorations in the non-bonded group survived, and 55 of 60 bonded restorations survived with five unaccounted for at follow-up. Post-insertion sensitivity was not significantly different (P > 0.05) at baseline or two-year follow-up. No fractures of tooth tissue were reported and there was no significant difference between the groups or matched pairs of restorations in their marginal adaptation (P > 0.05). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to either claim or refute a difference in survival between bonded and non-bonded amalgam restorations. This review only found one under-reported trial. This trial did not find any significant difference in the in-service performance of moderately sized adhesively bonded amalgam restorations, in terms of their survival rate and marginal integrity, in comparison to non-bonded amalgam restorations over a two-year period. In view of the lack of evidence on the additional benefit of adhesively bonding amalgam in comparison with non-bonded amalgam, it is important that clinicians are mindful of the additional costs that may be incurred.

WITHDRAWN: Community-based population-level interventions for promoting child oral health.

BACKGROUND: Dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease are commonly occurring, preventable chronic conditions. Even though much is known about how to treat oral disease, currently we do not know which community-based population-level interventions are most effective and equitable in preventing poor oral health. OBJECTIVES: Primary • To determine the effectiveness of community-based population-level oral health promotion interventions in preventing dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Secondary • To determine the most effective types of interventions (environmental, social, community and multi-component) and guiding theoretical frameworks.• To identify interventions that reduce inequality in oral health outcomes.• To examine the influence of context in the design, delivery and outcomes of interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from January 1996 to April 2014: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), BIOSIS Previews, Web of Science, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), ScienceDirect, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Citation Index, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. SELECTION CRITERIA: Included studies were individual- and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before-and-after studies and quasi-experimental and interrupted time series. To be included, interventions had to target the primary outcomes: dental caries (measured as decayed, missing and filled deciduous teeth/surfaces, dmft/s; Decayed, Missing and Filled permanent teeth/surfaces, DMFT/S) and gingival or periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Studies had to report on one or more of the primary outcomes at baseline and post intervention, or had to provide change scores for both intervention and control groups. Interventions were excluded if they were solely of a chemical nature (e.g. chlorhexidine, fluoride varnish), were delivered primarily in a dental clinical setting or comprised solely fluoridation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed screening, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias of included studies (a team of six review authors - four review authors and two research assistants - assessed all studies). We calculated mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for continuous data. When data permitted, we undertook meta-analysis of primary outcome measures using a fixed-effect model to summarise results across studies. We used the I2 statistic as a measure of statistical heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: This review includes findings from 38 studies (total n = 119,789 children, including one national study of 99,071 children, which contributed 80% of total participants) on community-based oral health promotion interventions delivered in a variety of settings and incorporating a range of health promotion strategies (e.g. policy, educational activities, professional oral health care, supervised toothbrushing programmes, motivational interviewing). We categorised interventions as dietary interventions (n = 3), oral health education (OHE) alone (n = 17), OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste (n = 8) and OHE in combination with a variety of other interventions (including professional preventive oral health care, n = 10). Interventions generally were implemented for less than one year (n = 26), and only 11 studies were RCTs. We graded the evidence as having moderate to very low quality.We conducted meta-analyses examining impact on dental caries of each intervention type, although not all studies provided sufficient data to allow pooling of effects across similar interventions. Meta-analyses of the effects of OHE alone on caries may show little or no effect on DMFT (two studies, mean difference (MD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.36, low-quality evidence), dmft (three studies, MD -0.3, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.52, low-quality evidence) and DMFS (one study, MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.22, very low-quality evidence). Analysis of studies testing OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste may show a beneficial effect on dmfs (three studies, MD -1.59, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.52, low-quality evidence) and dmft (two studies, MD -0.97, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.89, low-quality evidence) but may show little effect on DMFS (two studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.10, low-quality evidence) and DMFT (three studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.07, moderate-quality evidence). Meta-analyses of two studies of OHE in an educational setting combined with professional preventive oral care in a dental clinic setting probably show a very small effect on DMFT (-0.09 weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% CI -0.1 to -0.08, moderate-quality evidence). Data were inadequate for meta-analyses on gingival health, although positive impact was reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence of low certainty suggesting that community-based oral health promotion interventions that combine oral health education with supervised toothbrushing or professional preventive oral care can reduce dental caries in children. Other interventions, such as those that aim to promote access to fluoride, improve children's diets or provide oral health education alone, show only limited impact. We found no clear indication of when is the most effective time to intervene during childhood. Cost-effectiveness, long-term sustainability and equity of impacts and adverse outcomes were not widely reported by study authors, limiting our ability to make inferences on these aspects. More rigorous measurement and reporting of study results would improve the quality of the evidence.

Community-based population-level interventions for promoting child oral health.

BACKGROUND: Dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease are commonly occurring, preventable chronic conditions. Even though much is known about how to treat oral disease, currently we do not know which community-based population-level interventions are most effective and equitable in preventing poor oral health. OBJECTIVES: Primary • To determine the effectiveness of community-based population-level oral health promotion interventions in preventing dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Secondary • To determine the most effective types of interventions (environmental, social, community and multi-component) and guiding theoretical frameworks.• To identify interventions that reduce inequality in oral health outcomes.• To examine the influence of context in the design, delivery and outcomes of interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from January 1996 to April 2014: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), BIOSIS Previews, Web of Science, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), ScienceDirect, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Citation Index, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. SELECTION CRITERIA: Included studies were individual- and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before-and-after studies and quasi-experimental and interrupted time series. To be included, interventions had to target the primary outcomes: dental caries (measured as decayed, missing and filled deciduous teeth/surfaces, dmft/s; Decayed, Missing and Filled permanent teeth/surfaces, DMFT/S) and gingival or periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Studies had to report on one or more of the primary outcomes at baseline and post intervention, or had to provide change scores for both intervention and control groups. Interventions were excluded if they were solely of a chemical nature (e.g. chlorhexidine, fluoride varnish), were delivered primarily in a dental clinical setting or comprised solely fluoridation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed screening, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias of included studies (a team of six review authors - four review authors and two research assistants - assessed all studies). We calculated mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for continuous data. When data permitted, we undertook meta-analysis of primary outcome measures using a fixed-effect model to summarise results across studies. We used the I2 statistic as a measure of statistical heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: This review includes findings from 38 studies (total n = 119,789 children, including one national study of 99,071 children, which contributed 80% of total participants) on community-based oral health promotion interventions delivered in a variety of settings and incorporating a range of health promotion strategies (e.g. policy, educational activities, professional oral health care, supervised toothbrushing programmes, motivational interviewing). We categorised interventions as dietary interventions (n = 3), oral health education (OHE) alone (n = 17), OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste (n = 8) and OHE in combination with a variety of other interventions (including professional preventive oral health care, n = 10). Interventions generally were implemented for less than one year (n = 26), and only 11 studies were RCTs. We graded the evidence as having moderate to very low quality.We conducted meta-analyses examining impact on dental caries of each intervention type, although not all studies provided sufficient data to allow pooling of effects across similar interventions. Meta-analyses of the effects of OHE alone on caries may show little or no effect on DMFT (two studies, mean difference (MD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.36, low-quality evidence), dmft (three studies, MD -0.3, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.52, low-quality evidence) and DMFS (one study, MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.22, very low-quality evidence). Analysis of studies testing OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste may show a beneficial effect on dmfs (three studies, MD -1.59, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.52, low-quality evidence) and dmft (two studies, MD -0.97, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.89, low-quality evidence) but may show little effect on DMFS (two studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.10, low-quality evidence) and DMFT (three studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.07, moderate-quality evidence). Meta-analyses of two studies of OHE in an educational setting combined with professional preventive oral care in a dental clinic setting probably show a very small effect on DMFT (-0.09 weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% CI -0.1 to -0.08, moderate-quality evidence). Data were inadequate for meta-analyses on gingival health, although positive impact was reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence of low certainty suggesting that community-based oral health promotion interventions that combine oral health education with supervised toothbrushing or professional preventive oral care can reduce dental caries in children. Other interventions, such as those that aim to promote access to fluoride, improve children's diets or provide oral health education alone, show only limited impact. We found no clear indication of when is the most effective time to intervene during childhood. Cost-effectiveness, long-term sustainability and equity of impacts and adverse outcomes were not widely reported by study authors, limiting our ability to make inferences on these aspects. More rigorous measurement and reporting of study results would improve the quality of the evidence.

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth.

BACKGROUND: Endodontic treatment involves removal of the dental pulp and its replacement by a root canal filling. Restoration of root filled teeth can be challenging due to structural differences between vital and non-vital root-filled teeth. Direct restoration involves placement of a restorative material e.g. amalgam or composite, directly into the tooth. Indirect restorations consist of cast metal or ceramic (porcelain) crowns. The choice of restoration depends on the amount of remaining tooth, and may influence durability and cost. The decision to use a post and core in addition to the crown is clinician driven. The comparative clinical performance of crowns or conventional fillings used to restore root-filled teeth is unknown. This review updates the original, which was published in 2012. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of restoration of endodontically treated teeth (with or without post and core) by crowns versus conventional filling materials. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE via OVID, CINAHL via EBSCO, LILACS via BIREME. We also searched the reference lists of articles and ongoing trials registries.There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. The search is up-to-date as of 26 March 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials in participants with permanent teeth that have undergone endodontic treatment. Single full coverage crowns compared with any type of filling materials for direct restoration or indirect partial restorations (e.g. inlays and onlays). Comparisons considered the type of post and core used (cast or prefabricated post), if any. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trial and assessed its risk of bias. We carried out data analysis using the 'treatment as allocated' patient population, expressing estimates of intervention effect for dichotomous data as risk ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included one trial, which was judged to be at high risk of performance, detection and attrition bias. The 117 participants with a root-filled, premolar tooth restored with a carbon fibre post, were randomised to either a full coverage metal-ceramic crown or direct adhesive composite restoration. None experienced a catastrophic failure (i.e. when the restoration cannot be repaired), although only 104 teeth were included in the final, three-year assessment. There was no clear difference between the crown and composite group and the composite only group for non-catastrophic failures of the restoration (1/54 versus 3/53; RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 3.05) or failures of the post (2/54 versus 1/53; RR 1.96; 95% CI 0.18 to 21.01) at three years. The quality of the evidence for these outcomes is very low. There was no evidence available for any of our secondary outcomes: patient satisfaction and quality of life, incidence or recurrence of caries, periodontal health status, and costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to assess the effects of crowns compared to conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth. Until more evidence becomes available, clinicians should continue to base decisions about how to restore root-filled teeth on their own clinical experience, whilst taking into consideration the individual circumstances and preferences of their patients.

Interventions for the management of external root resorption.

BACKGROUND: External root resorption is a pathological process, which tends to occur following a wide range of mechanical or chemical stimuli such as infection, pressure, trauma or orthodontic tooth movement. Although it is predominantly detected by radiography, in some cases root resorption may be identified by clinical symptoms such as pain, swelling and mobility of the tooth. Treatment alternatives are case-dependent and aim to address the cause of the resorption and aid the regeneration of the resorptive lesion. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of any interventions that can be used in the management of external root resorption in permanent teeth. SEARCH METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 14 October 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 14 October 2015) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 14 October 2015). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of permanent teeth with any type of external root resorption, which has been confirmed by clinical and radiological examination, comparing one type of intervention (root canal medications and canal filling, splinting or extraction of teeth or the surgical removal of any relevant pathology) with another, or with placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened search records independently. Full papers were obtained for potentially relevant trials. If data had been extracted, the statistical guidelines set out in the Cochrane Handbook would have been followed. MAIN RESULTS: No randomised controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria were identified. However, we identified one ongoing study that is potentially relevant to this review and will be assessed when it is published. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify any reports of randomised controlled trials regarding the efficacy of different interventions for the management of external root resorption. In view of the lack of reliable evidence on this topic, clinicians must decide on the most appropriate means of managing this condition according to their clinical experience with regard to patient-related factors. There is a need for well designed and conducted clinical trials on this topic, which conform to the CONSORT statement (www.consort-statement.org/).

Oral rinses, mouthwashes and sprays for improving recovery following tonsillectomy.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in The Cochrane Library in Issue 1, 2010 and previously updated in 2011.Tonsillectomy is the surgical removal of lymphoid tissue, the palatine tonsil, which is located at the back of the throat. It is still commonly performed for patients who have recurrent bouts of acute tonsillitis. Although tonsillectomy is considered a fairly minor procedure, pain and bleeding are two of the most common complications; either may delay recovery and can on occasion lead to hospital readmission. Postoperative tonsillectomy medication should provide an adequate reduction in morbidity while minimising side effects, therefore topical agents would seem to be an ideal, safe option. A number of mouthwashes and topical sprays are available which offer pain relief or can help to reduce bleeding in the immediate postoperative period. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of oral rinses, mouthwashes and sprays in improving recovery following tonsillectomy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 4 July 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials in which oral rinses, mouthwashes and sprays, used pre- and postoperatively, have been compared with placebo in adults or children undergoing tonsillectomy, with or without adenoidectomy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors selected trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data independently. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials (593 participants; 397 children and 196 adults). The period of follow-up ranged from 24 hours to two weeks. Few of the trials provided reliable data for the pre-specified primary outcomes and none for the secondary outcomes. The risk of bias was high in most of the included trials. Lidocaine spray appeared to be more effective than saline spray at reducing the severity of pain until the third postoperative day. A small number of participants experienced a burning or stinging sensation with benzydamine spray but not sufficient to discontinue usage. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Poor reporting quality and inadequate data did not permit comprehensive and reliable conclusions to be made. Future trials should be well-constructed and pay more attention to the methods used to assess outcomes, the timing of the assessments, and the quality of reporting and subsequent analysis of the data.

Interventions for the management of mandibular fractures.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the mandible (lower jaw) are a common occurrence and usually related to interpersonal violence or road traffic accidents. Mandibular fractures may be treated using open (surgical) and closed (non-surgical) techniques. Fracture sites are immobilized with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) or other external or internal devices (i.e. plates and screws) to allow bone healing. Various techniques have been used, however uncertainty exists with respect to the specific indications for each approach. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to provide reliable evidence of the effects of any interventions either open (surgical) or closed (non-surgical) that can be used in the management of mandibular fractures, excluding the condyles, in adult patients. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 28 February 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 28 February 2013), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 28 February 2013), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (to 7 April 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (to 7 April 2013) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 7 April 2013). The reference lists of all trials identified were checked for further studies. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials evaluating the management of mandibular fractures without condylar involvement. Any studies that compared different treatment approaches were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Results were to be expressed as random-effects models using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was to be investigated to include both clinical and methodological factors. MAIN RESULTS: Twelve studies, assessed as high (six) and unclear (six) risk of bias, comprising 689 participants (830 fractures), were included. Interventions examined different plate materials and morphology; use of one or two lag screws; microplate versus miniplate; early and delayed mobilization; eyelet wires versus Rapid IMF™ and the management of angle fractures with intraoral access alone or combined with a transbuccal approach. Patient-oriented outcomes were largely ignored and post-operative pain scores were inadequately reported. Unfortunately, only one or two trials with small sample sizes were conducted for each comparison and outcome. Our results and conclusions should therefore be interpreted with caution. We were able to pool the results for two comparisons assessing one outcome. Pooled data from two studies comparing two miniplates versus one miniplate revealed no significant difference in the risk of post-operative infection of surgical site (risk ratio (RR) 1.32, 95% CI 0.41 to 4.22, P = 0.64, I(2) = 0%). Similarly, no difference in post-operative infection between the use of two 3-dimensional (3D) and standard (2D) miniplates was determined (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.19 to 8.13, P = 0.81, I(2) = 27%). The included studies involved a small number of participants with a low number of events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review illustrates that there is currently inadequate evidence to support the effectiveness of a single approach in the management of mandibular fractures without condylar involvement. The lack of high quality evidence may be explained by clinical diversity, variability in assessment tools used and difficulty in grading outcomes with existing measurement tools. Until high level evidence is available, treatment decisions should continue to be based on the clinician's prior experience and the individual circumstances.

'You learn to smile with your eyes', exploring the impact of enhanced personal protective equipment on primary care dental practitioners in the UK: An interpretative phenomenological study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to explore how dental practitioners in primary care settings perceive the impact of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) upon patient communication and wider clinical practice. METHODS: This study utilized a qualitative approach, rooted in critical realism. An interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) methodology was adopted as the study method. In accordance with IPA, in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted. Eight dental practitioners were recruited, with data analysis conducted according to the principles of IPA. RESULTS: Three themes were synthesized (related to communication and clinical practice): (1) Impaired communication and relationship building; (2) Physical impacts and required adjustments when wearing enhanced-PPE; and (3) Psychological stress of implementing enhanced-PPE. Theme one reflects changes to the dynamic of communication between patients and colleagues brought about by enhanced-PPE. Theme two describes the physical and psychological strains of providing care in enhanced-PPE and the ways through which practitioners tried to overcome these challenges. Theme three explores how the roll-out and guidance related to the use of enhanced-PPE affected clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Dental Practitioners described several barriers to communication as well as physical and mental stressors caused by enhanced-PPE, all of which were perceived to impact upon the quality of care provided to patients. Further research is required to develop effective interventions to mitigate the impact of enhanced-PPE upon clinical practice and to explore the long-term impact of enhanced-PPE on clinical practice, post-COVID.

Bacterial protease alleviate chronic liver fibrosis induced by thioacetamide through suppression of hepatic stellate cells consequently decrease its proliferative index.

In chronic liver diseases, liver fibrosis occurs due to excessive extracellular matrix (ECM) protein accumulation. Approximately 2 million deaths occur yearly due to liver disease, while cirrhosis is the 11th most common cause of death. Therefore, newer compounds or biomolecules must be synthesized to treat chronic liver diseases. In this aspect, the present study focuses on the assessment of the anti-inflammatory and antioxidant impact of Bacterial Protease (BP) produced by a new mutant strain of bacteria (Bacillus cereus S6-3/UM90) and 4,4'-(2,5-dimethoxy-1,4-phenylene) bis (1-(3-ethoxy phenyl)-1H-1,2,3-triazole) (DPET) in the treatment of early stage of liver fibrosis induced by thioacetamide (TAA). Sixty male rats were divided into six groups, ten rats each as follows: (1) Control group, (2) BP group, (3) TAA group, (4) TAA-Silymarin (S) group, (5) TAA-BP group, and (6) TAA-DPET group. Liver fibrosis significantly elevated liver function ALT, AST, and ALP, as well as anti-inflammatory interleukin 6 (IL-6) and VEGF. The oxidative stress parameters (MDA, SOD, and NO) were significantly increased with a marked reduction in GSH. Expression of MAPK and MCP-1 was unregulated in the TAA group, with downregulation of Nrf2 was observed. TAA caused histopathological alterations associated with hepatic vacuolation and fibrosis, increasing collagen fibers and high immuno-expression of VEGF. On the other hand, treatment with BP successfully improved the severe effects of TAA on the liver and restored histological architecture. Our study concluded the protective potentials of BP for attenuating liver fibrosis and could be used as adjuvant therapy for treating hepatic fibrosis.

Carnitine supplementation for inborn errors of metabolism.

BACKGROUND: Inborn errors of metabolism are genetic conditions which can lead to abnormalities in the synthesis and metabolism of proteins, carbohydrates, or fats. It has been proposed that in some instances carnitine supplementation should be provided to infants with a suspected metabolic disease as an interim measure, particularly whilst awaiting test results. Carnitine supplementation is used in the treatment of primary carnitine deficiency, and also where the deficiency is a secondary complication of several inborn errors of metabolism, such as organic acidaemias and fatty acid oxidation defects in children and adults. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of carnitine supplementation in the treatment of inborn errors of metabolism. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 4) and MEDLINE via Ovid (1950 to July week 4 2007), LILACS (15/05/2008) and Iranmedex (15/05/2008) and also the reference lists of retrieved articles.Date of most recent search of the Group's Inborn Errors of Metabolism Register: 27 October 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing carnitine supplementation (in different dose, frequency, or duration) versus placebo in children and adults diagnosed with an inborn error of metabolism. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened and assessed the eligibility of the identified trials. MAIN RESULTS: No trials were included in the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no published or ongoing randomised controlled clinical trials relevant to this review question. Therefore, in the absence of any high level evidence, clinicians should base their decisions on clinical experience and in conjunction with preferences of the individual where appropriate. This does not mean that carnitine is ineffective or should not be used in any inborn error of metabolism. However, given the lack of evidence both on the effectiveness and safety of carnitine and on the necessary dose and frequency to be prescribed, the current prescribing practice should continue to be observed and monitored with care until further evidence is available. Methodologically sound trials, reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, are required. It should be considered whether placebo-controlled trials in potentially lethal diseases, e.g. carnitine transporter disorder or glutaric aciduria type I, are ethical.

Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists for dysmenorrhoea.

BACKGROUND: Dysmenorrhoea is a common gynaecological complaint that can affect as many as 50% of premenopausal women, 10% of whom suffer severely enough to be rendered incapacitated for one to three days during each menstrual cycle. Primary dysmenorrhoea is where women suffer from menstrual pain but lack any pathology in their pelvic anatomy. Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists have been used in the treatment of women with primary dysmenorrhoea but their effects are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of beta2-adrenoceptor agonists in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhoea. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register; CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 8); MEDLINE; EMBASE; PsycINFO and the EBM Reviews databases. The last search was on 22 August 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing beta2-adrenoceptor agonists with placebo or no treatment, each other or any other conventional treatment in women of reproductive age with primary dysmenorrhoea. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials involving 187 women with an age range of 15 to 40 years were included. Oral isoxsuprine was compared with placebo in two trials; terbutaline oral spray, ritodrine chloride and oral hydroxyphenyl-orciprenalin were compared with placebo in a further three trials. Clinical diversity in the studies in terms of the interventions being evaluated, assessments at different time points and the use of different assessment tools mitigated against pooling of outcome data across studies in order to provide a summary estimate of effect for any of the comparisons. Only one study, with unclear risk of bias, reported pain relief with a combination of isoxsuprine, acetaminophen and caffeine. None of the other studies reported any significant clinical difference in effectiveness between the intervention and placebo. Adverse effects were reported with all of these medications in up to a quarter of the total number of participants. They included nausea, vomiting, dizziness, quivering, tremor and palpitations. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence presented in this review was based on a few relatively small-sized studies that were categorised to have unclear to high risk of bias, which does not allow confident decision-making at present about the use of beta2-adrenoceptor agonists for dysmenorrhoea. The benefits as reported in one study should be balanced against the wide array of unacceptable side effects documented with this class of medication. We have emphasised the lack of precision and limitations in the reported data where appropriate.