Caleza-Jiménez Carolina, Rodríguez Romero Inés, Ribas-Perez David, Biedma-Perea María
Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Seville, C/Avicena S/N, 41009 Seville, Spain.
Children (Basel). 2024 Nov 7;11(11):1353. doi: 10.3390/children11111353.
As a result of the dental alterations pacifiers can cause, several designs have been described, differing in the shape and size of the teat. The aim of this review was to compare the influence of the physiological pacifier on the development of malocclusions in children with other types of pacifier. The research question was: does the use of physiological pacifiers cause less dentomaxillary alterations than other designs?
A scoping review was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus. The ROBINS-I risk of bias tool was used for the methodology assessment of the included studies.
Of the 122 articles identified in the initial search, 5 articles met all the inclusion criteria. In all of them, in general, the use of the pacifier caused malocclusions such as an anterior open bite, a posterior crossbite, an increased overjet, and an involvement of the overbite. Children who began using the physiological pacifier very early, between 0 and 3 months, were less likely to develop finger sucking/thumb sucking compared to children who started after 3 months. In the prevalence of open anterior bite and overjet, there was a significant difference between the use of conventional pacifiers and anatomical pacifiers compared to the use of physiological pacifiers.
the physiological pacifier can cause fewer oral alterations and could be the best option as a pacifier, however, more well-designed and high-quality randomised clinical trials are required.
由于安抚奶嘴可能导致牙齿改变，人们描述了几种设计，奶嘴的形状和大小各不相同。本综述的目的是比较生理性安抚奶嘴与其他类型安抚奶嘴对儿童错牙合畸形发展的影响。研究问题是：与其他设计相比，使用生理性安抚奶嘴是否会导致更少的牙颌面改变？
根据系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA），使用PubMed、Embase和Scopus进行了一项范围综述。ROBINS-I偏倚风险工具用于对纳入研究的方法学评估。
在初步检索中确定的122篇文章中，有5篇符合所有纳入标准。总体而言，在所有这些研究中，使用安抚奶嘴会导致错牙合畸形，如前牙开合、后牙反合、覆盖增加和覆合受累。与3个月后开始使用的儿童相比，0至3个月开始使用生理性安抚奶嘴的儿童出现吮指/吮拇指的可能性较小。在开放性前牙开合和覆盖的患病率方面，与使用生理性安抚奶嘴相比，使用传统安抚奶嘴和解剖学安抚奶嘴之间存在显著差异。
生理性安抚奶嘴可能导致较少的口腔改变，可能是作为安抚奶嘴的最佳选择，然而，需要更多设计良好且高质量的随机临床试验。
