ABSTRACT
Dental decay and dental treatment are suggested to be related to body growth in children. The aim of this study was first to assess the relation between dental caries and body proportions cross-sectionally in a Suriname caries child population and secondly to investigate whether dental treatment had a significant influence on body growth of these children in a randomised controlled trial using different treatment strategies. Three hundred eighty 6-year-old children with untreated dental decay participated in the study. Caries prevalence and presence of dentogenic infections were recorded. All children were randomly assigned to four different treatment groups ranging from full dental treatment to no invasive treatment at all. Body growth was evaluated by children's height, weight and body mass index. Participants were evaluated after 6 months and 1, 2 and 3 years. Cross-sectionally, negative correlations were observed between anthropometric measures and the number of untreated carious surfaces and caries experience of the children. Next, no significant differences in growth pattern between the treatment groups were observed. Based on these results, it is suggested that caries activity is a negative predictor for body growth in children and dental intervention does not show significant improvement within 3 years.
Subject(s)
Body Size , Dental Caries/physiopathology , Dental Caries/therapy , Dental Restoration, Permanent , Body Mass Index , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , DMF Index , Dental Caries/complications , Dental Caries/epidemiology , Female , Growth Disorders/etiology , Growth Disorders/therapy , Humans , Linear Models , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Prevalence , Statistics, Nonparametric , Suriname/epidemiology , Tooth ExtractionABSTRACT
Significant treatment variation exists in the Netherlands between teams treating patients with cleft lip, alveolus, and/or palate, resulting in a confusing and undesirable situation for patients, parents, and practitioners. Therefore, to optimize cleft care, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) were developed. The aim of this report is to describe CPG development, share the main recommendations, and indicate knowledge gaps regarding cleft care. Together with patients and parents, a multidisciplinary working group of representatives from all relevant disciplines assisted by two experienced epidemiologists identified the topics to be addressed in the CPGs. Searching the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases identified 5157 articles, 60 of which remained after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. We rated the quality of the evidence from moderate to very low. The working group formulated 71 recommendations regarding genetic testing, feeding, lip and palate closure, hearing, hypernasality, bone grafting, orthodontics, psychosocial guidance, dentistry, osteotomy versus distraction, and rhinoplasty. The final CPGs were obtained after review by all stakeholders and allow cleft teams to base their treatment on current knowledge. With high-quality evidence lacking, the need for additional high-quality studies has become apparent.