SynthesisInternational journal of paediatric dentistry2026
Effectiveness of Various Pain Control Methods in Managing MIH-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of paediatric 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPain management in children with molar-incisor hypomineralisation (MIH) presents a significant challenge, as affected teeth often respond poorly to local anaesthesia due to altered enamel and heightened pulp sensitivity. Overcoming these difficulties is crucial to achieving effective dental outcomes.
aimTo evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacological, desensitising and behavioural strategies for pain control in children and adolescents with MIH.
designSystematic search of multiple electronic databases identified studies published between 2001 and 2024. Eligible designs included randomised controlled trials, randomised crossover studies and clinical trials. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2 and ROBINS-I V2 tools and certainty of evidence graded with GRADEpro. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to assess anaesthetic success with 4% articaine.
resultsThirteen studies were selected, with six included in the meta-analysis. Pooled success rates for 4% articaine were 0.849 for inferior alveolar nerve block and 0.915 for intraosseous injection. Findings suggest improved anaesthetic success compared with 2% lidocaine. Pre-emptive ibuprofen, laser desensitisation and virtual reality distraction also showed benefits for reducing pain and anxiety.
conclusionCurrent evidence suggests that an individualised, multimodal approach may improve pain management in children with MIH. However, further high-quality comparative studies are needed to guide clinical protocols.
trial registrationPROSPERO Registration: CRD42024474840.
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.