Protocol for Northern Ireland Caries Prevention in Practice Trial (NIC-PIP) trial: a randomised controlled trial to measure the effects and costs of a dental caries prevention regime for young children attending primary care dental services.

BACKGROUND: Dental caries is a persistent public health problem with little change in the prevalence in young children over the last 20 years. Once a child contracts the disease it has a significant impact on their quality of life. There is good evidence from Cochrane reviews including trials that fluoride varnish and regular use of fluoride toothpaste can prevent caries. The Northern Ireland Caries Prevention in Practice Trial (NIC-PIP) trial will compare the costs and effects of a caries preventive package (fluoride varnish, toothpaste, toothbrush and standardised dental health education) with dental health education alone in young children. METHODS/DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial on children initially aged 2 and 3 years old who are regular attenders at the primary dental care services in Northern Ireland. Children will be recruited and randomised in dental practices. Children will be randomised to the prevention package of both fluoride varnish (twice per year for three years), fluoride toothpaste (1,450 ppm F) (supplied twice per year), a toothbrush (supplied twice a year) or not; both test and control groups receive standardised dental health education delivered by the dentist twice per year. Randomisation will be conducted by the Belfast Trust Clinical Research Support Centre ([CRSC] a Clinical Trials Unit). 1200 participants will be recruited from approximately 40 dental practices. Children will be examined for caries by independent dental examiners at baseline and will be excluded if they have caries. The independent dental examiners will examine the children again at 3 years blinded to study group.The primary end-point is whether the child develops caries (cavitation into dentine) or not over the three years. One secondary outcome is the number of carious surfaces in the primary dentition in children who experience caries. Other secondary outcomes are episodes of pain, extraction of primary teeth, other adverse events and costs which will be obtained from parental questionnaires. DISCUSSION: This is a pragmatic trial conducted in general dental practice. It tests a composite caries prevention intervention, which represents an evidence based approach advocated by current guidance from the English Department of Health which is feasible to deliver to all low risk (caries free) children in general dental practice. The trial will provide valuable information to policy makers and clinicians on the costs and effects of caries prevention delivered to young children in general dental practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT No: 2009 - 010725 - 39 ISRCTN: ISRCTN36180119 Ethics Reference No: 09/H1008/93:

Oral health behaviours of parents and young children in a practice-based caries prevention trial in Northern Ireland.

OBJECTIVES: The NICPIP trial evaluated the costs and effects of a caries prevention intervention delivered to 2- to 3-year-old children attending dental practices in Northern Ireland. This supplementary study explored the oral health behaviours of children and their parents to help understand the reasons for the trial's findings. METHODS: A mixed methods study that included a questionnaire completed by all parents (n = 1058) at the time they brought their child for the NICPIP final clinical assessment. The questionnaire collected data on frequency of toothbrushing and sugar consumption. Questionnaire data were analysed by trial group and caries status. Parents of trial participants (n = 42) were invited to take part in telephone interviews. Parents were purposively sampled according to trial group and whether or not their child developed caries. The interviews explored how and why oral health behaviours happened. Interview data were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: The questionnaire data indicated that toothbrushing and between-meal sugar snacking were common in the majority of children. The children of parents who automatically reminded their child to brush their teeth were more likely to remain caries-free (Odds Ratio 1.24; 95% CI 1.08, 1.41; P = .002). Frequency of sweet drink consumption was associated with the child developing caries (Odds Ratio 0.88; 95% CI 0.79, 0.98; P = .021). The interview data showed that parents had positive attitudes towards brushing both in terms of perceived importance and expected outcomes. Attitudes towards sugar snacking were more complex, with parents reporting difficulties in controlling this behaviour. Sugar was described as being something that was "ever present" in children's lives. CONCLUSIONS: Toothbrushing was widely adopted from a young age, but between-meal sugar consumption was highly prevalent. The results suggest that effective family-level and population-level interventions are needed to reduce sugar consumption if substantial improvements in caries prevention are to be achieved.

A randomised controlled trial to measure the effects and costs of a dental caries prevention regime for young children attending primary care dental services: the Northern Ireland Caries Prevention In Practice (NIC-PIP) trial.

BACKGROUND: Dental caries is the most common disease of childhood. The NHS guidelines promote preventative care in dental practices, particularly for young children. However, the cost-effectiveness of this policy has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To measure the effects and costs of a composite fluoride intervention designed to prevent caries in young children attending dental services. DESIGN: The study was a two-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, with an allocation ratio of 1 : 1. Randomisation was by clinical trials unit, using randomised permuted blocks. Children/families were not blinded; however, outcome assessment was blinded to group assessment. SETTING: The study took place in 22 NHS dental practices in Northern Ireland, UK. PARTICIPANTS: The study participants were children aged 2-3 years, who were caries free at baseline. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention was composite in nature, comprising a varnish containing 22,600 parts per million (p.p.m.) fluoride, a toothbrush and a 50-ml tube of toothpaste containing 1450 p.p.m. fluoride; plus standardised, evidence-based prevention advice provided at 6-monthly intervals over 3 years. The control group received the prevention advice alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states. Secondary outcome measures were the number of decayed, missing or filled tooth surfaces in primary dentition (dmfs) in caries-active children, the number of episodes of pain, the number of extracted teeth and the costs of care. Adverse reactions (ARs) were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1248 children (624 randomised to each group) were recruited and 1096 (549 in the intervention group and 547 in the control group) were included in the final analyses. A total of 87% of the intervention children and 85% of control children attended every 6-month visit (p = 0.77). In total, 187 (34%) children in the intervention group converted to caries active, compared with 213 (39%) in the control group [odds ratio (OR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.04; p = 0.11]. The mean number of tooth surfaces affected by caries was 7.2 in the intervention group, compared with 9.6 in the control group (p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the number of episodes of pain between groups (p = 0.81). However, 164 out of the total of 400 (41%) children who converted to caries active reported toothache, compared with 62 out of 696 (9%) caries-free children (OR 7.1 95% CI 5.1 to 9.9; p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of teeth extracted in caries-active children (p = 0.95). Ten children in the intervention group had ARs of a minor nature. The average direct dental care cost was £155.74 for the intervention group and £48.21 for the control group over 3 years (p < 0.05). The mean cost per carious surface avoided over the 3 years was estimated at £251.00. LIMITATIONS: The usual limitations of a trial such as generalisability and understanding the underlying reasons for the outcomes apply. There is no mean willingness-to-pay threshold available to enable assessment of value for money. CONCLUSIONS: A statistically significant effect could not be demonstrated for the primary outcome. Once caries develop, pain is likely. There was a statistically significant difference in dmfs in caries-active children in favour of the intervention. Although adequately powered, the effect size of the intervention was small and of questionable clinical and economic benefit. FUTURE WORK: Future work should assess the caries prevention effects of interventions to reduce sugar consumption at the population and individual levels. Interventions designed to arrest the disease once it is established need to be developed and tested in practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36180119 and EudraCT 2009-010725-39. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 71. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.