ReviewClinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry2026
Impact of Postoperative Instruction Delivery Methods on Patient Compliance After Minor Oral Surgeries: A Systematic Review.
Review in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: It has been demonstrated that giving precise postoperative instructions reduces the possibility of adverse events after surgery. Adherence to postoperative instructions during recovery is impacted by patient comprehension, which is influenced by the approach of instruction delivery. This systematic review's main goal was to critically assess the available data regarding the association between the methods of introducing postoperative instructions and patients' compliance after minor oral surgeries. Methods: In accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, a systematic review was conducted. Four databases (PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, and Google Scholar) were thoroughly searched up to October 31, 2025. Covidence software was used by two independent reviewers to screen the material. The methodological quality and risk of bias in included studies were systematically assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool in Covidence. Ten studies were included: seven Randomized Controlled Trials, one cross-sectional, and two cohort studies. Results: Two studies reported a statistically significant positive association between phone call follow-up and adherence to postoperative instructions, showing that phone follow-up had higher scores of compliance level (9.7±0.5 and 9.14±0.78) compared to extended written instructions (7.9±2.1) and to verbal and printed instructions combined (7.64±0.83), respectively. Pictorial instructions or Android-based mobile applications were found to significantly improve patient compliance in two other research studies. Another study demonstrated that audiovisual (A-V) aids for postoperative instructions had a higher median comprehension score (12±2) than the verbal (9.5±3) and written (10±2) methods. However, findings from three studies on verbal and written instructions were inconsistent. Conclusion: The use of enhancement techniques of postoperative instruction, such as multimedia, mobile applications, phone calls, and pictorial instructions, particularly when combined with baseline verbal explanations, demonstrated superior efficacy in enhancing patient comprehension, information retention, and compliance across diverse patient populations who had undergone minor oral surgeries.
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.