Guidelines for conducting split-mouth clinical studies in restorative dentistry

Authors

  • Rayssa Ferreira Zanatta Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Tania Mara da Silva Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Maria Angela Lacerda Rangel Esper Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Eduardo Bresciani Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Taciana Marco Ferraz Caneppele Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Sergio Eduardo de Paiva Gonçalves Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14295/bds.2017.v20i2.1404

Abstract

The split-mouth design used in some clinical trials make a randomization scheme on site level where two treatments are randomly assigned to sites of one of the two halves of the mouth. The aim of this review was to summarize guidelines for conducting split-mouth clinical studies in Restorative Dentistry. This is a review performed through scientific articles published between 2004 and 2014 indexed in MEDLINE, PubMed and Scielo databases. The study evaluated USPHS and FDI criteria. The current review showed the main characteristics used in split-mouth studies presented the Restorative Dentistry literature, as ethical aspects, sample calculation, methods of selection and evaluation patients, in order to provide a guideline for clinical conduction. It showed a standard of methodologies to enable comparison among studies.          

Keywords: Clinical studies, split-mouth design, dentistry.

Author Biographies

Rayssa Ferreira Zanatta, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Tania Mara da Silva, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Maria Angela Lacerda Rangel Esper, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Eduardo Bresciani, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Taciana Marco Ferraz Caneppele, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Sergio Eduardo de Paiva Gonçalves, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University-UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil

Downloads

Published

2017-06-28

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 2 (2017): Apr. - Jun. / 2017 - Published Jun 2017

Section

Literature Review