Kumar Raghav Gujjar1, Arjen van Wijk2, Ratika Kumar3, Ad de Jongh4. 1. Faculty of Dentistry, SEGi University, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: kumarraghav@segi.edu.my. 2. Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Public Health Building, Brisbane, Australia. 4. Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; School of Health Sciences, Salford University, Manchester, United Kingdom; Institute of Health and Society, University of Worcester, Worcester, United Kingdom; School of Psychology, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of technology-based interventions for the treatment of dental anxiety in children and adults. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search using relevant keywords was conducted in PubMed-Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, and The Cochrane Library. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared technology-based interventions with inactive controls in the treatment of moderate to severe dental anxiety were included. RESULTS: A total of seven RCTs were included in the review. These studies investigated the effectiveness of video modeling, computerized cognitive behavioral therapy, virtual reality exposure therapy, and distraction with music and audiovisual video material. Six studies examining video modeling, computerized cognitive behavioral therapy, virtual reality exposure therapy, and distraction (audiovisual) showed significantly greater reductions in dental anxiety than inactive controls in both children and adults. None of the included studies followed Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines completely or reported sufficient data, thereby precluding a possible meta-analysis. Four out of seven included studies were assessed to be at high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: A limited number of studies supported the effectiveness of technology-based interventions in the treatment of dental anxiety in children and adults. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The quality of the methods of studies on the effects of technology-based interventions allows only limited inferences on the effects of these interventions. However, within the limitations of the systematic review, the results converge to suggest that technology-based interventions may be useful as an adjunct to standard dental care. High-quality RCTs are needed to determine the (relative) effectiveness of these interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017064810.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of technology-based interventions for the treatment of dental anxiety in children and adults. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search using relevant keywords was conducted in PubMed-Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, and The Cochrane Library. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared technology-based interventions with inactive controls in the treatment of moderate to severe dental anxiety were included. RESULTS: A total of seven RCTs were included in the review. These studies investigated the effectiveness of video modeling, computerized cognitive behavioral therapy, virtual reality exposure therapy, and distraction with music and audiovisual video material. Six studies examining video modeling, computerized cognitive behavioral therapy, virtual reality exposure therapy, and distraction (audiovisual) showed significantly greater reductions in dental anxiety than inactive controls in both children and adults. None of the included studies followed Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines completely or reported sufficient data, thereby precluding a possible meta-analysis. Four out of seven included studies were assessed to be at high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: A limited number of studies supported the effectiveness of technology-based interventions in the treatment of dental anxiety in children and adults. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The quality of the methods of studies on the effects of technology-based interventions allows only limited inferences on the effects of these interventions. However, within the limitations of the systematic review, the results converge to suggest that technology-based interventions may be useful as an adjunct to standard dental care. High-quality RCTs are needed to determine the (relative) effectiveness of these interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017064810.
Authors: Luca Aquilanti; Andrea Santarelli; Marco Mascitti; Maurizio Procaccini; Giorgio Rappelli Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-04 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Mohammed Y Tarrosh; Yaser Ali Alhazmi; Mohammed Yahya Aljabri; Mohammed Mousa H Bakri; Hamed A Al Shawkani; Mohammed M Al Moaleem; Thiyezen Abdullah Al-Dhelai; Shilpa Bhandi; Shankargouda Patil Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2022-07-31
Authors: Francesco Cerritelli; Marco Chiera; Marco Abbro; Valentino Megale; Jorge Esteves; Alberto Gallace; Andrea Manzotti Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 4.003