首页> 外文期刊>Evidence-based dentistry >Which is the most effective drug or method of sedation used for anxious children? What are the most effective techniques for the use of conscious sedation behaviour management in paediatric dentistry?
【24h】

Which is the most effective drug or method of sedation used for anxious children? What are the most effective techniques for the use of conscious sedation behaviour management in paediatric dentistry?

机译:焦虑症儿童使用哪种最有效的镇静药物或镇静方法?在儿科牙科中使用自觉镇静行为管理最有效的技术是什么?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

DATA SOURCES: Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Dissertation Abstracts, SIGLE, the World Wide Web (Google) and the Community of Science Database were searched for relevant trials and references. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned and the authors contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information. There were no language restrictions. Trials pre-1966 were not searched. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were selected if they met the following criteria: randomised controlled trials of conscious sedation comparing two or more drugs/techniques/placebo undertaken by the dentist or one of the dental team in anxious children up to 16 years of age. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Information regarding methods, participants, interventions and outcome measures and results was independently extracted, in duplicate, by two authors. Specialist advice was sought to categorise interventions. Authors of trials were contacted for details of randomisation and withdrawals and a quality assessment was carried out not using any formal scoring system. The Cochrane Oral Health Group statistical guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were included with 2345 subjects in total. Overall quality of studies was found to be disappointing with poor reporting, often the main problem. Data reported could not easily be aggregated into groups to facilitate description of results. Meta-analysis of the available data was also not possible for the same reason. The variety of differing drug regimens compared made it difficult to isolate groups of studies that were sufficiently similar in design to allow sensible comparison. Where groups of studies could be isolated, the differing outcome measures used made their meta-analysis impossible. CONCLUSIONS: Authors were not able to reach any definitive conclusion on which was the most effective drug or method of sedation used for anxious children. A list of proposed areas of study was described.
机译:数据来源:检索了Medline,PubMed,Embase,Cochrane对照试验中心登记册,论文摘要,SIGLE,万维网(Google)和科学共同体数据库,以查找相关试验和参考文献。扫描了相关文章的参考文献清单,并与作者联系以鉴定试验并获得更多信息。没有语言限制。未检索1966年以前的试验。研究选择:如果研究符合以下条件,则选择这些研究:有意识镇静的随机对照试验,比较了牙医或其中一个牙科团队在16岁以下焦虑儿童中进行的两种或多种药物/技术/安慰剂的使用。数据提取和综合:有关方法,参与者,干预措施和结果指标以及结果的信息由两名作者独立提取,一式两份。寻求专家意见对干预措施进行分类。联系了试验的作者以了解随机分组和退出的详细信息,并且不使用任何正式的评分系统进行质量评估。遵循了Cochrane口腔健康小组的统计指南。结果:总共进行了53项研究,共计2345名受试者。研究的总体质量令人失望,报告质量差,这往往是主要问题。所报告的数据不能轻易地汇总到组中以方便描述结果。由于同样的原因,也无法对可用数据进行荟萃分析。所比较的各种不同药物方案使得难以分离设计上足够相似以进行合理比较的研究组。在可以分离研究组的情况下,使用了不同的结果测量方法,因此无法进行荟萃分析。结论:作者未能得出任何明确的结论,即哪种方法最适用于焦虑症儿童的镇静药物或镇静方法。描述了拟议的研究领域清单。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号