对沙特阿拉伯和全球进行的活体研究中根管填充物质量的比较分析:系统回顾

IF 1.5 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-09-13 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CCIDE.S479321
Abdulmajeed Saeed Alshahrani, Ahmed Ali Alelyani, Sadun Mohammad Al Ageel Albeaji, Dalia AlHarith, Ahmed Abdullah A Al Malwi, Abdulrahman Abdullah Aldhbaan, Khaled Saleh J Alshehri, Alwaleed Essam Bakri, Abdullah Ahmed Ali Sahli, Wafa Hassan Alaajam, Mohammed M Al Moaleem
{"title":"对沙特阿拉伯和全球进行的活体研究中根管填充物质量的比较分析:系统回顾","authors":"Abdulmajeed Saeed Alshahrani, Ahmed Ali Alelyani, Sadun Mohammad Al Ageel Albeaji, Dalia AlHarith, Ahmed Abdullah A Al Malwi, Abdulrahman Abdullah Aldhbaan, Khaled Saleh J Alshehri, Alwaleed Essam Bakri, Abdullah Ahmed Ali Sahli, Wafa Hassan Alaajam, Mohammed M Al Moaleem","doi":"10.2147/CCIDE.S479321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Root canal treatment (RCT) is a common procedure practiced daily by dentists worldwide. The current systematic review aimed to evaluate and compare clinical studies on the quality of root canal fillings (RCFs) carried out by dentists with different levels of experience conducted worldwide with those conducted specifically in Saudi Arabia (SA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A full literature search was conducted in Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science, Elsevier's Scopus, Embase, CINHAL, and PubMed, without a restriction to studies published before January 2015. Also, a manual search was carried out by checking papers that may have been missed during the electronic search. The following keywords were used: [(quality of root canal filling(s)) OR (quality of root canal obturation)) and dental practitioners as (general dental practitioners; final year students; endodontist; specialist) AND (root canal obturation) OR (endodontic treatment)]. Parameters of the quality of RCFs, such as length, density, and taper, were assessed and counted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 13 worldwide and nine SA studies were included in this review, published between 2015 and 2023. Molars were the most treated teeth, at 42.3% and 40.2% for the worldwide and SA studies, respectively. Cases treated by final year students had the highest percentage, at 60.0% for both study groups. The percentages of acceptable quality, with regard to the length, density, and taper of RCFs, were 70.9%, 77.6%, and 84.3%, and 73.2%, 64.6%, and 67.8% for the worldwide and SA studies, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The overall acceptable quality of RCFs was marginally higher in worldwide studies than in SA studies. Both prevalences can be considered as good, which indicates that the quality of RCFs is moving in the right direction.</p>","PeriodicalId":10445,"journal":{"name":"Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11407322/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Analysis of the Quality of Root Canal Fillings of In Vivo Studies Conducted in Saudi Arabia and Worldwide: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Abdulmajeed Saeed Alshahrani, Ahmed Ali Alelyani, Sadun Mohammad Al Ageel Albeaji, Dalia AlHarith, Ahmed Abdullah A Al Malwi, Abdulrahman Abdullah Aldhbaan, Khaled Saleh J Alshehri, Alwaleed Essam Bakri, Abdullah Ahmed Ali Sahli, Wafa Hassan Alaajam, Mohammed M Al Moaleem\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/CCIDE.S479321\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Root canal treatment (RCT) is a common procedure practiced daily by dentists worldwide. The current systematic review aimed to evaluate and compare clinical studies on the quality of root canal fillings (RCFs) carried out by dentists with different levels of experience conducted worldwide with those conducted specifically in Saudi Arabia (SA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A full literature search was conducted in Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science, Elsevier's Scopus, Embase, CINHAL, and PubMed, without a restriction to studies published before January 2015. Also, a manual search was carried out by checking papers that may have been missed during the electronic search. The following keywords were used: [(quality of root canal filling(s)) OR (quality of root canal obturation)) and dental practitioners as (general dental practitioners; final year students; endodontist; specialist) AND (root canal obturation) OR (endodontic treatment)]. Parameters of the quality of RCFs, such as length, density, and taper, were assessed and counted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 13 worldwide and nine SA studies were included in this review, published between 2015 and 2023. Molars were the most treated teeth, at 42.3% and 40.2% for the worldwide and SA studies, respectively. Cases treated by final year students had the highest percentage, at 60.0% for both study groups. The percentages of acceptable quality, with regard to the length, density, and taper of RCFs, were 70.9%, 77.6%, and 84.3%, and 73.2%, 64.6%, and 67.8% for the worldwide and SA studies, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The overall acceptable quality of RCFs was marginally higher in worldwide studies than in SA studies. Both prevalences can be considered as good, which indicates that the quality of RCFs is moving in the right direction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10445,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11407322/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S479321\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S479321","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:根管治疗 (RCT) 是全世界牙医日常开展的一项常见手术。当前的系统性综述旨在评估和比较由具有不同经验水平的牙医在全球范围内进行的根管充填(RCF)质量临床研究和在沙特阿拉伯(SA)进行的根管充填质量临床研究:在 Clarivate Analytics's Web of Science、Elsevier's Scopus、Embase、CINHAL 和 PubMed 中进行了全面的文献检索,但不限于 2015 年 1 月之前发表的研究。此外,还对电子检索中可能遗漏的论文进行了人工检索。关键词如下[根管充填质量)或(根管封塞质量)),牙科医生为(普通牙科医生;毕业班学生;牙髓病学家;专科医生)和(根管封塞)或(牙髓治疗)]。对 RCF 的长度、密度和锥度等质量参数进行了评估和统计:本综述共纳入了 2015 年至 2023 年间发表的 13 项全球研究和 9 项南非研究。磨牙是接受治疗最多的牙齿,在全球和南澳大利亚的研究中分别占42.3%和40.2%。由毕业班学生治疗的病例比例最高,在两组研究中均为 60.0%。在RCF的长度、密度和锥度方面,可接受质量的百分比分别为70.9%、77.6%和84.3%,而在全球研究和南非研究中,可接受质量的百分比分别为73.2%、64.6%和67.8%:结论:全球研究的 RCF 整体可接受质量略高于南非研究。结论:全球研究的总体可接受质量略高于南澳大利亚研究,两者的流行率均可视为良好,这表明 RCFs 的质量正朝着正确的方向发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Comparative Analysis of the Quality of Root Canal Fillings of In Vivo Studies Conducted in Saudi Arabia and Worldwide: A Systematic Review.

Aim: Root canal treatment (RCT) is a common procedure practiced daily by dentists worldwide. The current systematic review aimed to evaluate and compare clinical studies on the quality of root canal fillings (RCFs) carried out by dentists with different levels of experience conducted worldwide with those conducted specifically in Saudi Arabia (SA).

Materials and methods: A full literature search was conducted in Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science, Elsevier's Scopus, Embase, CINHAL, and PubMed, without a restriction to studies published before January 2015. Also, a manual search was carried out by checking papers that may have been missed during the electronic search. The following keywords were used: [(quality of root canal filling(s)) OR (quality of root canal obturation)) and dental practitioners as (general dental practitioners; final year students; endodontist; specialist) AND (root canal obturation) OR (endodontic treatment)]. Parameters of the quality of RCFs, such as length, density, and taper, were assessed and counted.

Results: A total of 13 worldwide and nine SA studies were included in this review, published between 2015 and 2023. Molars were the most treated teeth, at 42.3% and 40.2% for the worldwide and SA studies, respectively. Cases treated by final year students had the highest percentage, at 60.0% for both study groups. The percentages of acceptable quality, with regard to the length, density, and taper of RCFs, were 70.9%, 77.6%, and 84.3%, and 73.2%, 64.6%, and 67.8% for the worldwide and SA studies, respectively.

Conclusion: The overall acceptable quality of RCFs was marginally higher in worldwide studies than in SA studies. Both prevalences can be considered as good, which indicates that the quality of RCFs is moving in the right direction.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
43
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Novel Nano-Hydroxyapatite Agarose-Based Hydrogel for Biomimetic Remineralization of Demineralized Human Enamel: An in-vitro Study. Enhancing Communication Between Dental Laboratories and Clinics: The Role of Information Technology Systems in a Developing Country. The Correlation Between Odontogenic Infection and Total Spectrum of Dental Caries with Oral Health Related Quality of Life in Children with Intellectual Disabilities. User Insights into Fake Snap-on Veneers: Perceptions and Experiences. A Retrospective Evaluation of Mandibular Fracture in Kabul, Afghanistan.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1