A randomized controlled trial of orthodontist-based brief advice to prevent child obesity

Interventions to prevent obesity in children aged 12 to 18 years old

BACKGROUND

Prevention of obesity in adolescents is an international public health priority. The prevalence of overweight and obesity is over 25% in North and South America, Australia, most of Europe, and the Gulf region. Interventions that aim to prevent obesity involve strategies that promote healthy diets or 'activity' levels (physical activity, sedentary behaviour and/or sleep) or both, and work by reducing energy intake and/or increasing energy expenditure, respectively. There is uncertainty over which approaches are more effective, and numerous new studies have been published over the last five years since the previous version of this Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions that aim to prevent obesity in adolescents by modifying dietary intake or 'activity' levels, or a combination of both, on changes in BMI, zBMI score and serious adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in adolescents (mean age 12 years and above but less than 19 years), comparing diet or 'activity' interventions (or both) to prevent obesity with no intervention, usual care, or with another eligible intervention, in any setting. Studies had to measure outcomes at a minimum of 12 weeks post baseline. We excluded interventions designed primarily to improve sporting performance.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our outcomes were BMI, zBMI score and serious adverse events, assessed at short- (12 weeks to < 9 months from baseline), medium- (9 months to < 15 months) and long-term (≥ 15 months) follow-up. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 74 studies (83,407 participants); 54 studies (46,358 participants) were included in meta-analyses. Sixty studies were based in high-income countries. The main setting for intervention delivery was schools (57 studies), followed by home (nine studies), the community (five studies) and a primary care setting (three studies). Fifty-one interventions were implemented for less than nine months; the shortest was conducted over one visit and the longest over 28 months. Sixty-two studies declared non-industry funding; five were funded in part by industry. Dietary interventions versus control The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of dietary interventions on body mass index (BMI) at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.41 to 0.06; 3 studies, 605 participants), medium-term follow-up (MD -0.65, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.11; 3 studies, 900 participants), and standardised BMI (zBMI) at long-term follow-up (MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.38 to 0.10; 2 studies, 1089 participants); all very low-certainty evidence. Compared with control, dietary interventions may have little to no effect on BMI at long-term follow-up (MD -0.30, 95% CI -1.67 to 1.07; 1 study, 44 participants); zBMI at short-term (MD -0.06, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.01; 5 studies, 3154 participants); and zBMI at medium-term (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.21; 1 study, 112 participants) follow-up; all low-certainty evidence. Dietary interventions may have little to no effect on serious adverse events (two studies, 377 participants; low-certainty evidence). Activity interventions versus control Compared with control, activity interventions do not reduce BMI at short-term follow-up (MD -0.64, 95% CI -1.86 to 0.58; 6 studies, 1780 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably do not reduce zBMI at medium- (MD 0, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.05; 6 studies, 5335 participants) or long-term (MD -0.05, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.02; 1 study, 985 participants) follow-up; both moderate-certainty evidence. Activity interventions do not reduce zBMI at short-term follow-up (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.05; 7 studies, 4718 participants; high-certainty evidence), but may reduce BMI slightly at medium-term (MD -0.32, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.11; 3 studies, 2143 participants) and long-term (MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.05; 1 study, 985 participants) follow-up; both low-certainty evidence. Seven studies (5428 participants; low-certainty evidence) reported data on serious adverse events: two reported injuries relating to the exercise component of the intervention and five reported no effect of intervention on reported serious adverse events. Dietary and activity interventions versus control Dietary and activity interventions, compared with control, do not reduce BMI at short-term follow-up (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.13; 11 studies, 3429 participants; high-certainty evidence), and probably do not reduce BMI at medium-term (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.11; 8 studies, 5612 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or long-term (MD 0.06, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.16; 6 studies, 8736 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) follow-up. They may have little to no effect on zBMI in the short term, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -0.09, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.02; 3 studies, 515 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and they may not reduce zBMI at medium-term (MD -0.05, 95% CI -0.1 to 0.01; 6 studies, 3511 participants; low-certainty evidence) or long-term (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.01; 7 studies, 8430 participants; low-certainty evidence) follow-up. Four studies (2394 participants) reported data on serious adverse events (very low-certainty evidence): one reported an increase in weight concern in a few adolescents and three reported no effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence demonstrates that dietary interventions may have little to no effect on obesity in adolescents. There is low-certainty evidence that activity interventions may have a small beneficial effect on BMI at medium- and long-term follow-up. Diet plus activity interventions may result in little to no difference. Importantly, this updated review also suggests that interventions to prevent obesity in this age group may result in little to no difference in serious adverse effects. Limitations of the evidence include inconsistent results across studies, lack of methodological rigour in some studies and small sample sizes. Further research is justified to investigate the effects of diet and activity interventions to prevent childhood obesity in community settings, and in young people with disabilities, since very few ongoing studies are likely to address these. Further randomised trials to address the remaining uncertainty about the effects of diet, activity interventions, or both, to prevent childhood obesity in schools (ideally with zBMI as the measured outcome) would need to have larger samples.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of nutrition and its impact on orthodontic treatment/management

The nutritional needs already increased by adolescent growth, activity, and stress are further exacerbated by the physical, physiological, and psychological stress that orthodontic treatment causes. Hence, the main objective of this systematic review was to analyze the relationship between adequate nutrition and its impact on orthodontic treatment success rates. Using relevant keywords, reference searches, and citation searches, the databases such as PubMed-Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus were all searched. "Diet," "Minerals," "Nutrition," "Orthodontics," and "Vitamins" were the search terms used to scour the database. The 10 studies selected for the systematic review and subsequent meta-analysis could not conclusively establish the correlation between proper nutrition and its impact on orthodontic treatment of the patient. There was virtually little connection between patients' dietary intake and the effectiveness of their orthodontic treatment. Additionally, a direct causal link between the two could not be established legitimately because the majority of the studies reviewed only noted an impact during the early stages of the treatment. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42022380828.

Interventions to prevent obesity in school-aged children 6-18 years: An update of a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis including studies from 2015-2021

BACKGROUND

Childhood obesity remains a global public health priority due to the enormous burden it generates. Recent surveillance data suggests there has been a sharp increase in the prevalence of childhood obesity during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Cochrane review of childhood obesity prevention interventions (0-18 years) updated to 2015 is the most rigorous and comprehensive review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on this topic. A burgeoning number of high quality studies have been published since that are yet to be synthesised.

METHODS

An update of the Cochrane systematic review was conducted to include RCT studies in school-aged children (6-18 years) published to 30 June 2021 that assessed effectiveness on child weight (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020218928). Available cost-effectiveness and adverse effect data were extracted. Intervention effects on body mass index (BMI) were synthesised in random effects meta-analyses by setting (school, after-school program, community, home), and meta-regression examined the association of study characteristics with intervention effect.

FINDINGS

Meta-analysis of 140 of 195 included studies (183,063 participants) found a very small positive effect on body mass index for school-based studies (SMD -0·03, 95%CI -0·06,-0·01; trials = 93; participants = 131,443; moderate certainty evidence) but not after-school programs, community or home-based studies. Subgroup analysis by age (6-12 years; 13-18 years) found no differential effects in any setting. Meta-regression found no associations between study characteristics (including setting, income level) and intervention effect. Ten of 53 studies assessing adverse effects reported presence of an adverse event. Insufficient data was available to draw conclusions on cost-effectiveness.

INTERPRETATION

This updated synthesis of obesity prevention interventions for children aged 6-18 years, found a small beneficial impact on child BMI for school-based obesity prevention interventions. A more comprehensive assessment of interventions is required to identify mechanisms of effective interventions to inform future obesity prevention public health policy, which may be particularly salient in for COVID-19 recovery planning.

FUNDING

This research was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Australia (Application No APP1153479).

Interventions for tobacco cessation delivered by dental professionals

BACKGROUND

Dental professionals are well placed to help their patients stop using tobacco products. Large proportions of the population visit the dentist regularly. In addition, the adverse effects of tobacco use on oral health provide a context that dental professionals can use to motivate a quit attempt.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, adverse events and oral health effects of tobacco cessation interventions offered by dental professionals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register up to February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions conducted by dental professionals in the dental practice or community setting, with at least six months of follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts for potential inclusion and extracted data from included trials. We resolved disagreements by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from all tobacco use (e.g. cigarettes, smokeless tobacco) at the longest follow-up, using the strictest definition of abstinence reported. Individual study effects and pooled effects were summarised as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models to combine studies where appropriate. We assessed statistical heterogeneity with the I² statistic. We summarised secondary outcomes narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty clinical trials involving 14,897 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Sixteen studies assessed the effectiveness of interventions for tobacco-use cessation in dental clinics and four assessed this in community (school or college) settings. Five studies included only smokeless tobacco users, and the remaining studies included either smoked tobacco users only, or a combination of both smoked and smokeless tobacco users. All studies employed behavioural interventions, with four offering nicotine treatment (nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or e-cigarettes) as part of the intervention. We judged three studies to be at low risk of bias, one to be at unclear risk of bias, and the remaining 16 studies to be at high risk of bias. Compared with usual care, brief advice, very brief advice, or less active treatment, we found very low-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural support provided by dental professionals, comprising either one session (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.41; I² = 66%; four studies, n = 6328), or more than one session (RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.11; I² = 61%; seven studies, n = 2639), on abstinence from tobacco use at least six months from baseline. We found moderate-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural interventions provided by dental professionals combined with the provision of NRT or e-cigarettes, compared with no intervention, usual care, brief, or very brief advice only (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.82; I² = 0%; four studies, n = 1221). We did not detect a benefit from multiple-session behavioural support provided by dental professionals delivered in a high school or college, instead of a dental setting (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.65; I² = 83%; three studies, n = 1020; very low-certainty evidence). Only one study reported adverse events or oral health outcomes, making it difficult to draw any conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low-certainty evidence that quit rates increase when dental professionals offer behavioural support to promote tobacco cessation. There is moderate-certainty evidence that tobacco abstinence rates increase in cigarette smokers if dental professionals offer behavioural support combined with pharmacotherapy. Further evidence is required to be certain of the size of the benefit and whether adding pharmacological interventions is more effective than behavioural support alone. Future studies should use biochemical validation of abstinence so as to preclude the risk of detection bias. There is insufficient evidence on whether these interventions lead to adverse effects, but no reasons to suspect that these effects would be specific to interventions delivered by dental professionals. There was insufficient evidence that interventions affected oral health.

Influence of increased body mass index on orthodontic tooth movement and related parameters in children and adolescents: A systematic review of longitudinal controlled clinical studies

Objectives:

To assess the impact of increased body mass index (BMI) on orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) and related parameters in children and adolescents.

Search sources:

A search of six electronic databases and manual searching were performed up to June 2019 without language and time restrictions.

Data selection:

Eligibility criteria were as follows: (1) longitudinal controlled clinical studies; (2) children and adolescents undergoing orthodontic therapy (OT); (3) no systemic diseases; (4) experimental group: patients with increased BMI; and (5) control group: patients with normal BMI.

Data extraction:

Screening, study selection and data extraction were performed; bias within studies was assessed using the Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies (ROBINS-I) tool.

Results:

Seven studies were included. One study showed that an increased BMI is associated with less wear-time of removable orthodontic appliances and one study found no significant association. One study showed that an increased BMI is associated with less cooperation during OT; however, not with the treatment results. One study reported higher pain experience during OT in adolescents with than without increased BMI. Two studies showed that increased BMI in adolescents is related to OTM, one with increased and one with decreased rates of OTM, respectively. One study reported an association between increased BMI and incidence of white spot lesions and gingivitis during OT. The ROBINS-I tool showed low to moderate risk of bias within studies.

Conclusions:

The influence of BMI on OTM and related parameters in children and adolescents remains debatable.