Systematic reviews in restorative dentistry: discussing relevant aspects

Abstract

Objective This article aims to discuss key aspects of systematic reviews (SR) focusing on the improvement of the conduct and reporting. Methods Important aspects of SRs, such as prospective registration of the review protocol, basic structure, inclusion criteria, use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, confidence in the results and future directions are discussed. To determine relevant aspects, a search was conducted without date limitations in PubMed (October 15th, 2017) to identify SRs written in English evaluating clinical performance of direct composite resin restoration in permanent posterior teeth or comparing direct composite resin with other material/techniques. The quality of SRs included was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 tool. Results Fifteen SRs were included. The overall confidence in the results of SRs was classified as critically low. Some aspects should be highlighted: SRs of in vitro studies are an important tool in restorative dentistry, and initiatives such as the PRISMA Statement and PROSPERO should be considered a standard code of practice. Conclusions The compliance with and awareness of the discussed aspects may be a significant feature of the improvement of SR quality in the dentistry. Clinical significance Initiatives such as the PRISMA Statement and PROSPERO should be taken in account by systematic reviewers in dentistry to improve the conduct and reporting of SRs, and to make their reviews are more clinically helpful.

Knowledge synthesis: How to improve the use of evidence from clinical trials?

“…All these SR phases are important for avoiding bias. Sarkis‐Onofre et al (2019) highlighted seven domains that can affect the conclusion of SRs and their validity 33 . Here, we discuss how these domains should be considered when performing an SR.…”

Effect of Non-Thermal Atmospheric Plasma on Micro-Tensile Bond Strength at Adhesive/Dentin Interface: A Systematic Review

“…Systematic reviews can help in the healthcare decision-making as they gather, summarize, and evaluate all studies discussing a specific research question [45]. Thus, they serve to identify gaps in the literature and suggest avenues for future studies.…”

“…Thus, they serve to identify gaps in the literature and suggest avenues for future studies. [46] PRISMA statement guidelines were followed in reporting this systematic review as it is recommended in reporting dental systematic reviews [45] and the PRISMA endorsement is associated with more thorough reporting compared to other guidelines [47]. Different bond strength tests can be used to evaluate resin-dentin bonding [48].…”

Applications of nano-materials in diverse dentistry regimes

“…The components are mostly methacrylatetype resins such urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA), bisphenol A-glycidylmethacrylate (Bis-GMA), and triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA). 144 However, several explorations have been conducted on inorganic llers to develop highperformance composite resins. 145,146 To attain the acceptable lengthy clinical restoration, composite resins should show adequate mechanical features, small polymerization shrinkage, higher wear resistance, and anti-bacterial activities.…”