Table 1.
Designs of the studies included in the systematic review.
| Llodra et al (2005),38 Cuba |
|
|
| Design: 36 mo; RCT; blind |
| Site: 1 primary school |
| Visits: 7 (every 6 months) |
| Sample: N = 452 (95% CI, 80% power) |
| Randomization: individual random basis |
| Inclusion criteria: age ≥6 y |
| Diagnostic criteria: DMFS; caries activity: changes in dentin hardness and color |
| TX group: 38% SDF application every 6 mo |
| Control: no SDF; demographic characteristics not defined |
| SDF application technique: in primary teeth, no removal of carious tissue; in permanent teeth, removal of carious tissue |
| SDF adverse events: black stains; white lesions in oral mucosa in 3 participants (It is not clear whether these 3 children also developed black stains.) |
|
|
| Braga et al (2009),39 Brazil |
|
|
| Design: 30 mo; pilot RCT; blind |
| Site: Dental School of the University of São Paulo |
| Visits: baseline and 3, 6, 12, 18, and 30 mo |
| Sample: N = 66 first molars (22 children) |
| Randomization: assignment randomly selected and distributed in groups |
| Inclusion criteria: age 5–7 y with first molar with occlusal active initial caries without cavitation |
| Diagnostic criteria: modified Carvalho index (visual); radiographs at 6, 12, and 30 mo |
| TX groups: cross-toothbrushing technique; 10% SDF; glass ionomer cement |
| SDF application technique: applied in active caries lesions |
| SDF adverse events: black stains |
|
|
| Yee et al (2009),40 Nepal |
|
|
| Design: 24 mo; RCT; blind |
| Sites: kindergarten and primary schools |
| Visits: baseline and follow-up (6, 12, and 24 mo) |
| Sample: N = 976 (80% power, α = 0.05) |
|
Randomization: computer-generated list During randomization, sociodemographic characteristics were distributed homogenously between groups. |
| Inclusion criteria: age 3–9 y |
| Diagnostic criteria: DMFT and caries activity (changes in dentin hardness) |
| TX groups: 38% SDF without tea (SDF applied for 2 min); 38% SDF with tea (SDF applied for 2 min); 12% SDF without tea (SDF applied for 2 min) |
| Control: no treatment |
| SDF application technique: no caries removal |
| SDF adverse events: none reported |
|
|
| Dos Santos et al (2012),41 Brazil |
|
|
| Design: 12 mo; RCT |
| Sites: municipal schools |
| Visits: baseline, 6 mo, and 12 mo |
| Sample: N = 91 (90% CI, α = 0.05) |
| Randomization: by school |
| Inclusion criteria: age 5–6 y with primary teeth with active caries lesion with score of ICDAS 5 |
| Diagnostic criteria: ICDAS (code 5); Miller criteria; active caries lesions in the SDF group; failure of the sealant in the interim restorative treatment group (consistency of the dentin, resistance to probing) |
| TX groups: 30% SDF; interim restorative treatment |
| SDF application technique: in primary teeth, no removal of carious tissue |
| SDF adverse events: none reported |
|
|
| Monse et al (2012),42 Philippines |
|
|
| Design: 18 mo; RCT; blind |
| Sites: 8 public elementary schools |
| Visits: nonspecified |
| Sample: N = 1016 (80% power, α = 0.05) |
| Randomization: class list |
| Inclusion criteria: age 6–8 y with at least 1 erupted permanent first molar with a sound occlusal surface |
| Diagnostic criteria: WHO procedure tools and caries scores |
| TX groups: 38% SDF plus tannic acid (1 application); ART glass ionomer cement sealants plus high-viscosity material |
|
Control: no TX Due to noncompliance with the brushing program (3 schools), children were divided into nonbrushers and brushers during analysis. |
| SDF application technique: sound occlusal surfaces (or surfaces with enamel caries) of all erupted permanent first molars |
| SDF adverse events: none reported |
|
|
| Zhi et al (2012),43 China |
|
|
| Design: 24 mo; RCT; blind |
| Sites: 6 kindergartens |
| Visits: 6-mo intervals |
| Sample: N = 212 (80% power, α = 0.05) |
| Randomization: computer-generated list |
| Inclusion criteria: age 3–4 y with active dentin caries not involving the pulp |
| Diagnostic criteria: visual and tactile inspection |
| TX groups: 38% SDF every 12 mo; 38% SDF every 6 mo; glass ionomer cement every 12 mo |
| SDF application technique: removal of carious tissue by hand instruments |
| SDF adverse events: none reported |
|
|
| Duangthip et al (2016),44 Hong Kong |
|
|
| Design: 18 mo; RCT; blind |
| Sites: 16 kindergartens |
| Visits: baseline and 6, 12, and 18 mo |
| Sample: N = 304 (1670 lesions) (80% power, α = 0.05) |
| Randomization: stratified randomization |
| Inclusion criteria: age 3–4 y with at least 1 tooth with untreated active dentin caries not involving pulp |
| Diagnostic criteria: diagnosis of dentin caries by visual and tactile detection (ICDAS codes 5–6); visible plaque index |
| TX groups: 30% SDF at baseline every 12 mo; 30% SDF (3 applications at weekly intervals from baseline); 5% sodium fluoride varnish (3 applications at weekly intervals from baseline) |
| SDF application technique: no removal of carious tissue |
| SDF adverse events: black stains |
Abbreviations: ART, atraumatic restorative treatment; CI, confidence interval; DMFT, decayed, missing, and filled teeth; ICDAS, International Caries Detection and Assessment System; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SDF, silver diamine fluoride; TX, treatment; WHO, World Health Organization.