4.1 Review

Association between dental pain and oral health-related quality of life in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

COMMUNITY DENTISTRY AND ORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 48, Issue 4, Pages 257-263

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cdoe.12535

Keywords

child; quality of life; systematic review; toothache

Funding

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior [001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the impact of dental pain on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in children and adolescents. Methods Electronic and manual searches were performed with no restrictions of language or year of publication. The PECO strategy was used to identify observational studies involving participants up to 19 years of age with dental pain and to those without dental pain to determine the impact of this condition on OHRQoL. The methodological quality of the studies was appraised using the Fowkes and Fulton checklist. Meta-analysis was conducted by subgroups, based on OHRQoL questionnaires and effect measures. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Results Sixteen studies were included in the systematic review and fourteen in the meta-analysis. The methodological quality of four of these studies was considered poor. The pooled results of the subgroup analysis (SOHO-5, B-ECOHIS and Child-OIDP) showed that children with dental pain had a 3.64-fold greater chance of a negative impact on OHRQoL ([log] 95% CI: 2.80-4.72; I(2)0%; P < .001). The second meta-analysis (Child-OIDP, SOHO-5 and CPQ8-10) demonstrated statistical significance (SMD 0.79; 95% CI: 0.43-1.16; I(2)92%; P < .001), as did the pooled results considering the B-ECOHIS ([log] OR 7.75; 95% CI: 4.59-13.11; I(2)84%; P < .001). The certainty of evidence in all meta-analyses was low. Conclusions Although the quality of the evidence is low, dental pain has a negative impact on OHRQoL.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available