PurposeSpace Maintainers have long been used for the management of space loss in primary and mixed dentition, but there is a need to have an evidence based approach when selecting the most appropriate space maintainer for space management in children. This systematic review aimed to assess the survival rate of space maintainers in children.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted until October 2017 using PubMed, Scopus, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify peer- reviewed papers published in English. Search keywords and MeSH headings include “primary dentition” and “Fixed Space maintainers”. The inclusion criteria were clinical studies conducted in children less than 12 years of age, who required unilateral or bilateral fixed space maintainer. Retrieved papers were evaluated by four reviewers independently to assess suitability for inclusion in the systematic review and the final decision was made by consensus. Qualities of the included studies were assessed using Quality of Reporting of Observational Longitudinal Research by Oxford Academics and data were extracted for analysis.ResultsThe search identified a total of 39 papers for screening after removal of duplicate articles. Among the retrieved studies, 23 papers did not satisfy the study inclusion criteria. Consequently, 16 full text articles were retrieved and reviewed. Finally, those 11 papers which fulfilled all the inclusion criteria were selected and reviewed systematically. Most of the clinical trials were assessed as having moderate and low risk of bias.ConclusionThere is a wide variation in the survival rate of metal based and resin based space maintainers and also within the metal based space maintainers. There is an inadequate evidence to recommend one best fixed space maintainer due to lack of properly designed studies. Hence, clinical trial comparing different types of metal based space maintainer and resin based space maintainer with longer duration of follow-up must be performed to evaluate its survival rate.

Introduction:Dental caries is very common in primary dentition because of improper oral hygiene and increased intake of sucrose. Grossly decayed primary teeth require extraction. The space created by extracted teeth should be replaced by primary dentition to avoid migration of adjacent teeth into the space and to prevent the eruption of permanent tooth. Different appliances are used to maintain the space post extraction of the primary tooth to preserve the space for the eruption of the permanent tooth in a sequential manner.Aim:Evaluate the attitude and knowledge of parents toward the importance of maintaining primary dentition in their children.Methods:A survey was conducted among randomly selected 100 parents having children between the ages of 2 and 16 years from the general population of Chennai, India. A questionnaire was created was distributed. The data were later collected and statistical analysis was performed.Results:Hundred percent awareness was seen among parents regarding maintenance of oral hygiene in children. Only 65% parents reported visiting dentists only when the child complains of pain. Eighty-nine percent of the parents were aware of the harmful effects of thumb sucking habits. However, only a minimum percent parents thought that treating primary teeth was not very important as it would shed off.Conclusion:Even though parents were aware that primary teeth have to be managed properly, they were not aware of the various treatment modalities available for treating spaces after extraction of primary teeth and caries management. An increase in the knowledge will encourage parents to provide better oral health to their children.

Most common risk factors were order of birth, snacking more than thrice per day, source of drinking water, use of more than a smear amount of toothpaste, mother's work status and day care person of the child.

No abstract

Early Childhood Caries (ECC) are one of the major oral diseases affecting children. ECC adversely affects the children’s as well as their parent/caregivers quality of life. The present study aims to assess the quality of life in children with Early Childhood Caries aged 6–72 months using the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale. It also aims to compare the quality of life between children with pufa scores of > 0 and a pufa score = 0. A total of 238 children aged 6 months to 72 months with ECC and their parent/caregiver were included in the present study. Oral examinations of the children were performed by the principal examiner using the defs and pufa index, which was followed by a personal interview of the 13 items in the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact scale among the 238 parents/caregivers. The results showed that, overall, Early Childhood Caries have a negative impact on children’s quality of life, as assessed by the parent/caregiver. The overall Early Childhood Oral Health Impact scale score ranged from 0–32 (mean ± SD, 14.12 ± 6.72). Children with a pufa score > 0 (mean ± SD, 16.14 ± 6.27, p < 0.001) have significantly lower quality of life than children with pufa score = 0 (mean ± SD, 9.07 ± 4.94, p < 0.001). Early Childhood Caries had a negative impact on the quality of life of children aged 6–72 months. Children with a pufa score of “0” had better oral health-related quality of life than children with a pufa score > 0.