Click here for an explanation of these scores
Answer Rating key
|
search
|
|
strong
|
|
appraisal
|
|
weak
|
|
confidence
|
|
moderate
|
Question answered:16/04/08
A 2003 systematic review ‘Systematic review of studies comparing the anti-caries efficacy of children's toothpaste containing 600 ppm of fluoride or less with high fluoride toothpastes of 1,000 ppm or above’ was reviewed by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination [1]. Their summary was:
“The review found that 250-ppm fluoride toothpastes were not as effective as 1,000-ppm fluoride toothpastes at preventing dental caries in the permanent dentition. Data comparing 500-ppm and 1,000-ppm fluoride toothpastes were limited and further research is required. This was a good-quality systematic review and the authors' conclusions are likely to be reliable.”
A 2002 Cochrane systematic review ‘Fluoride toothpastes for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents’ [2] concluded:
“Supported by more than half a century of research, the benefits of fluoride toothpastes are firmly established. Taken together, the trials are of relatively high quality, and provide clear evidence that fluoride toothpastes are efficacious in preventing caries.”
With regard to fluorosis the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council reported [3]:
“Research question: Does topical fluoride supplementation result in dental fluorosis over and above no topical fluoride supplementation?
Two level IV studies provide evidence regarding the impact of the use of topical fluorides on dental fluorosis. One study showed that fluoridated toothpaste may be associated with ‘any fluorosis’. However, when ‘fluorosis of aesthetic concern’ was examined, no statistically significant difference between the higher fluoride dose group and the control group was found, and the prevalence of fluorosis in the higher dose toothpaste group was low (< 2%). One poor quality study in which fluorosis was measured after a campaign was implemented to reduce the amount of topical fluoride use in children suggested that a decrease in fluorosis was seen.”
References
1) http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/CRDWeb/ShowRecord.asp?View=Full&ID=12003003950
2) http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab002278.html
3) http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/_files/eh41.pdf
DISCLAIMER: TRIPanswers is a collection of clinical questions and answers. Each provider will have their own methodology in answering questions and these are likely not to be as rigorous as systematic review. If you have any doubt as to the implications of this contact the Q&A Service Provider for further information. This document is presented for information purposes only. This document cannot and should not be used as a basis of diagnosis or choice of treatment, and is in no way intended to replace professional medical care or attention by a qualified practitioner. TRIPanswers and TRIP Database Ltd are not responsible or liable for, directly or indirectly, ANY form of damage whatsoever resulting from the use/misuse of information contained in or implied by this document. Also, ensure you have read the terms and conditions for using the site.