Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26780162›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016

Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents.

Anneli Ahovuo-Saloranta, Helena Forss, Anne Hiiri, Anne Nordblad, Marjukka Mäkelä

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04163354 (Glass Ionomer Sealant Versus Fluoride Varnish Application to Prevent Occlusal Caries Among Preschool Children - a Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 51 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04163354 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Glass Ionomer Sealant Versus Fluoride Varnish Application to Prevent Occlusal Caries Among Preschool Children - a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2018 to 2022Enrolled348ConditionsPit and Fissure Caries, Glass Ionomer Cements, Tooth, Deciduous, ChildArms5% sodium fluoride varnish (NaF), Glass ionomer sealant (GIS)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 126 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. An update of treatment modalities in children and adolescents with teeth affected by molar incisor hypomineralisation (MIH): a systematic review.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Glass ionomer fissure sealants versus fluoride varnish application on children's behaviour: a randomised controlled trial.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2025
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. A novel application of a bioactive material as a pit and fissure sealant: in vitro pilot study evaluating the sealing ability and penetration.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Anneli Ahovuo-SalorantaFinnish Office for Health Technology Assessment (FinOHTA), National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Finn-Medi 3, Biokatu 10, Tampere, Finland, FI-33520.
Helena Forss
Anne Hiiri
Anne Nordblad
Marjukka Mäkelä
Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIFinnMedi (Finland) · FIMinistry of Social Affairs and Health · FITampere University · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost of the detected increment in dental caries among children and adolescents is confined to occlusal surfaces of posterior permanent molars. Dental sealants and fluoride varnishes are much used preventive options for caries. Although the effectiveness of sealants and fluoride varnishes for controlling caries as compared with no intervention has been demonstrated in clinical trials and summarised in systematic reviews, the relative effectiveness of these two interventions remains unclear. This review is an update of one first published in 2006 and last updated in 2010.

objectivesPrimary objective • To evaluate the relative effectiveness of fissure sealants compared with fluoride varnishes, or fissure sealants together with fluoride varnishes compared with fluoride varnishes alone, for preventing dental caries in the occlusal surfaces of permanent teeth of children and adolescents. Secondary objectives • To evaluate whether effectiveness is influenced by sealant material type and length of follow-up.• To document and report on data concerning adverse events associated with sealants and fluoride varnishes. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 18 December 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 11), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 18 December 2015) and EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 18 December 2015). We also searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on language or date of publication when searching electronic databases. We screened the reference lists of identified trials and review articles for additional relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with at least 12 months of follow-up comparing fissure sealants, or fissure sealants together with fluoride varnishes, versus fluoride varnishes for preventing caries in the occlusal surfaces of permanent premolar or molar teeth, in participants younger than 20 years of age at the start of the study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We attempted to contact study authors to obtain missing or unclear information.We grouped and analysed studies on the basis of sealant material type (resin-based sealant and glass ionomer-based sealant: glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer) and different follow-up periods. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) for caries or no caries on occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth. For trials with a split-mouth design, we used the Becker-Balagtas odds ratio. For continuous outcomes and data, we used means and standard deviations to obtain mean differences. We presented all measures with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methods.We conducted meta-analysis using the fixed-effect model, as data from only two studies were combined. We had planned to conduct meta-analyses using a random-effects model when more than three trials were included in the meta-analysis. MAIN

resultsIn this review, we included eight trials with 1746 participants (four of the trials were new since the 2010 update). Seven trials (1127 participants) contributed to the analyses, and children involved were five to 10 years of age at the start of the trial. Sealant versus fluoride varnish Resin-based fissure sealants compared with fluoride varnishes Four trials evaluated this comparison (three of them contributing to the analyses). Compared with fluoride varnish, resin-based sealants prevented more caries in first permanent molars at two-year follow-up (two studies in the meta-analysis with pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 0.94; P value = 0.02; I(2) = 0%; 358 children evaluated). We assessed the body of evidence as low quality. The caries-preventive benefit for sealants was maintained at longer follow-up in one trial at high risk of bias: 26.6% of sealant teeth and 55.8% of fluoride-varnished teeth had developed caries when 75 children were evaluated at nine years of follow-up. Glass ionomer-based sealants compared with fluoride varnishes Three trials evaluated this comparison: one trial with chemically cured glass ionomer and two with resin-modified glass ionomer. Researchers reported similar caries increment between study groups regardless of which glass ionomer material was used in a trial. Study designs were clinically diverse, and meta-analysis could not be conducted. The body of evidence was assessed as of very low quality. Sealant together with fluoride varnish versus fluoride varnish alone One split-mouth trial analysing 92 children at two-year follow-up found a significant difference in favour of resin-based fissure sealant together with fluoride varnish compared with fluoride varnish only (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.55). The body of evidence was assessed as low quality. Adverse events Three trials (two with resin-based sealant material and one with resin-modified glass ionomer) reported that no adverse events resulted from use of sealants or fluoride varnishes. The other five studies did not mention adverse events. AUTHORS'

conclusionsCurrently, scarce and clinically diverse data are available on the comparison of sealants and fluoride varnish applications; therefore it is not possible to draw clear conclusions about possible differences in effectiveness for preventing or controlling dental caries on occlusal surfaces of permanent molars. The conclusions of this updated review remain the same as those of the last update (in 2010). We found some low-quality evidence suggesting the superiority of resin-based fissure sealants over fluoride varnish applications for preventing occlusal caries in permanent molars, and other low-quality evidence for benefits of resin-based sealant and fluoride varnish over fluoride varnish alone. Regarding glass ionomer sealant versus fluoride varnish comparisons, we assessed the quality of the evidence as very low and could draw no conclusions.

Indexed as

AdolescentCariostatic AgentsChildDental CariesFluorides, TopicalHumansPit and Fissure SealantsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCariostatic AgentsFluorides, TopicalPit and Fissure Sealants

Identifiers

PMID26780162
PMCPMC7177291
OpenAlexW2266902699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.