Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Paediatric dentistry

Which of the preventive agents perform best for prevention of early childhood caries?

Abstract

Data sources

A comprehensive search strategy was planned a priori and accordingly three electronic databases including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL with no language and time restrictions were searched for finding the relevant literature. Hand searching of the relevant articles was also done to retrieve other possible studies.

Study selection

Both parallel and split-mouth RCTs with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years were included. Non-randomised studies were also selected.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data about study characteristics, demographic and clinical parameters, assessed outcome, outcome assessment methods etc. were retrieved by two independent authors. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was carried for two different outcomes viz caries increment and caries incidence. For the purpose of NMA, standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated for analysing the continuous outcome (caries increment) while Odds ratio was used for dichotomous outcome (caries incidence at individual level).

Results

A total of 3807 publication were retrieved and after sifting 33 RCTs and other quasi-randomised/ non-randomized studies were selected for this NMA. Network diagrams were created and two NMAs were carried; one for caries increment and another for caries incidence. A total of 18 preventive agents were explored for caries increment and amongst these, only Fluoride-foam and Fluoride-salt exhibited significant better prevention than the control; with SMD and confidence interval values of 0.69 (0.32–1.06) and 0.66 (0.13–1.20) respectively. While for caries incidence outcome 11 preventive agents could be included out of which, Probiotic-milk + LowF toothpaste, Fluoride-foam, Fluoride-Varnish, and FV + HFTP exhibited significant higher odds of caries prevention; and the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals were 0.34 (CI = 0.15–0.77), 0.48 (CI = 0.37–0.63), 0.63 (CI = 0.48–0.81), and 0.73 (CI = 0.57–0.93) respectively. SUCRA rankings were also obtained for both the outcomes.

Conclusions

Fluoride preparations, namely Fluoride-Foam (FF), Fluoride-Salt(FS) and Probiotic Milk+ Low-F toothpaste(PMLFTP), Fluoride-varnish(FV) and Fluoride-varnish+ High-F toothpaste (FVHFTP) were found to be effective in preventing early childhood caries.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Tinanoff N, Baez RJ, Diaz Guillory C, Donly KJ, Feldens CA, McGrath C, et al. Early childhood caries epidemiology, aetiology, risk assessment, societal burden, management, education, and policy: global perspective. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2019;29:238–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pitts N, Baez R, Diaz-Guallory C, et al. Early Childhood Caries: IAPD Bangkok Declaration. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2019;29:384–6.

  3. Soares RC, da Rosa SV, Moysés ST, Rocha JS, Bettega PVC, Werneck RI, et al. Methods for prevention of early childhood caries: overview of systematic reviews. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2021;31:394–421.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mbuagbaw L, Rochwerg B, Jaeschke R, Heels-Andsell D, Alhazzani W, Thabane L, et al. Approaches to interpreting and choosing the best treatments in network meta-analyses. Syst Rev. 2017;6:79.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Uribe SE, Innes N, Maldupa I. The global prevalence of early childhood caries: a systematic review with meta-analysis using the WHO diagnostic criteria. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2021;31:817–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neeraj Gugnani.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gugnani, N., Gugnani, S. Which of the preventive agents perform best for prevention of early childhood caries?. Evid Based Dent 24, 61–63 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-023-00882-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-023-00882-8

Search

Quick links