File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1016/j.identj.2024.01.003
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85184078391
- Find via
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Scopus: 0
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Motivational Interviewing on Periodontal Treatment Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis
Title | Motivational Interviewing on Periodontal Treatment Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Motivational interviewing Oral health Oral hygiene Periodontal health |
Issue Date | 1-Feb-2024 |
Publisher | Elsevier |
Citation | International Dental Journal, 2024 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Objectives: This systematic review investigated the clinical efficacy of motivational interviewing (MI) in improving oral hygiene and periodontal health in patients with periodontal diseases. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across various databases up to May 2023. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of MI on periodontal conditions in patients with gingivitis, periodontitis, and peri‑implantitis were included. After data screening, a risk-of-bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool. The meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models. Results: Out of 2108 records screened, 7 RCTs involving 474 patients were included in the qualitative synthesis, with 6 of these studies included in the meta-analysis. Amongst these, 5 studies had a high RoB and 2 had some concerns about bias. Although individual studies reported varied results regarding the effects of MI on different periodontal indices and parameters at different time points, the pooled results revealed no significant difference in the overall effect on plaque level, bleeding on probing, and gingival inflammation between the MI and control groups. In addition, there is insufficient evidence to suggest any significant effect on attachment loss or probing depth. Conclusions: The current evidence is insufficient to support the effectiveness of MI as an adjunctive intervention for improving oral hygiene and periodontal outcomes. However, these results should be interpreted with caution. Additional high-quality studies with standardised MI interventions are required to derive definite conclusions. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/342039 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 3.2 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.803 |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Zhan, Chaoning | - |
dc.contributor.author | Qu, Wanting | - |
dc.contributor.author | Fok, Melissa Rachel | - |
dc.contributor.author | Jin, Lijian | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lin, Yifan | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-26T05:39:14Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-03-26T05:39:14Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024-02-01 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | International Dental Journal, 2024 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0020-6539 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/342039 | - |
dc.description.abstract | <p>Objectives: This systematic review investigated the clinical efficacy of motivational interviewing (MI) in improving oral hygiene and periodontal health in patients with periodontal diseases. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across various databases up to May 2023. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of MI on periodontal conditions in patients with gingivitis, periodontitis, and peri‑implantitis were included. After data screening, a risk-of-bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool. The meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models. Results: Out of 2108 records screened, 7 RCTs involving 474 patients were included in the qualitative synthesis, with 6 of these studies included in the meta-analysis. Amongst these, 5 studies had a high RoB and 2 had some concerns about bias. Although individual studies reported varied results regarding the effects of MI on different periodontal indices and parameters at different time points, the pooled results revealed no significant difference in the overall effect on plaque level, bleeding on probing, and gingival inflammation between the MI and control groups. In addition, there is insufficient evidence to suggest any significant effect on attachment loss or probing depth. Conclusions: The current evidence is insufficient to support the effectiveness of MI as an adjunctive intervention for improving oral hygiene and periodontal outcomes. However, these results should be interpreted with caution. Additional high-quality studies with standardised MI interventions are required to derive definite conclusions.</p> | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | Elsevier | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | International Dental Journal | - |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
dc.subject | Motivational interviewing | - |
dc.subject | Oral health | - |
dc.subject | Oral hygiene | - |
dc.subject | Periodontal health | - |
dc.title | Motivational Interviewing on Periodontal Treatment Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.identj.2024.01.003 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85184078391 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1875-595X | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0020-6539 | - |