ReviewJournal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)2023
Evaluation of Two Pain Assessment Methods (Tactile and Air blast) for Comparison the Effectiveness of Nd:YAG Laser Therapy and Non-Laser Therapy on Dentin Hyper Sensitivity Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of lasers in managing dentine hypersensitivity: an umbrella review.Lasers in medical science · 2025Pooled it
- Advances in physical and chemical strategies for dentin hypersensitivity therapy.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- Cavity preparation with Er:YAGvs, Nd:YAG and diode lasers on remaining dentin thickness (RDT).Bioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Statement of the Problem: Dentin hypersensitivity (DH) is a common irritating condition. A precise sensitive test for its assessment can greatly aid in appropriate treatment planning. Purpose: This meta-analysis aims to compare the air blast and tactile tests for assessment of the efficacy Nd:YAG laser therapy versus non-laser treatments for DH in short-term and long-term follow-ups. Materials and Method: For this review, an electronic search of the literature was carried out in three databases by two researchers for English articles published until March 10, 2021. Pooling of the data extracted from the selected articles was performed according to the PRISMA statement by the random-effect model. The mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of pain score before the treatment onset and during the follow-up period according to the visual analog scale (VAS) were calculated. The level of heterogeneity was assessed by the I Results: Of 152 articles primarily retrieved, 9 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) using the air blast test and 4 RCTs using the tactile test were subjected to quantitative synthesis. In the short-term follow-up and immediately after treatment, the air blast test showed superiority of laser therapy compared with non-laser treatments (SMD: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.05-1.04, Conclusion: Comparison of laser therapy and non-laser modalities in the short-term reveal-ed higher sensitivity of the air blast test due to its mechanism of action compared with the tactile test. Further studies are required to interpret the results in the long-term follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.