International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  18 (2025)
Volume  17 (2024)
Volume  16 (2023)
Volume  15 (2022)
Volume  14 (2021)
Volume  13 (2020)
Volume  12 (2019)
Volume  11 (2018)
Volume  10 (2017)
Volume  9 (2016)
Volume  8 (2015)
Volume  7 (2014)
Volume  6 (2013)
Volume  5 (2012)
Volume  4 (2011)
Volume  3 (2010)
Volume  2 (2009)
Volume  1 (2008)
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 11 ( November, 2024 ) > List of Articles

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND MATA ANALYSIS

Acceptance of Parents toward Hand-over-mouth Exercise and Other Behavior Management Techniques for Pediatric Dental Care in the 21st Century: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies

Ashwin Jawdekar, Farheen Tafti, Sayali Deolikar, Laresh Mistry

Keywords : Behavior management, Child Behavior in dental office, Hand-over-mouth exercise, Hand-over-mouth, Meta-analysis, Parental acceptance, Systematic review

Citation Information : Jawdekar A, Tafti F, Deolikar S, Mistry L. Acceptance of Parents toward Hand-over-mouth Exercise and Other Behavior Management Techniques for Pediatric Dental Care in the 21st Century: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024; 17 (11):1302-1319.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2978

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 19-12-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: Hand-over-mouth exercise (HOME) is an aversive technique for child behavior management in a dental office. HOME has been omitted from various guidelines and certain teaching curricula due to legal and ethical issues. This systematic review meta-analysis (SRMA) was undertaken to understand the acceptance of parents toward HOME in comparison with that of other behavior management techniques (BMTs). Objectives: This SRMA compared parental acceptance for HOME and other BMTs from observational studies reported in the literature from 1st January 2000, to date. Methodology: Two authors independently searched data from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and others. Twenty-one studies remained in the systematic review, of which eleven could be included in the meta-analysis. Based on the summary findings of 1,034 participants from 10 studies, we compared parents’ acceptance for HOME vs other BMTs [voice control (VC), tell-show-do (TSD), physical restraint-active (PR-A), physical restraint-passive (PR-P), parental separation (PS), conscious sedation (CS), general anesthesia (GA), oral premedication (OP), and positive reinforcement (PR)]. Data analyses were carried out using RevMan 5.3. The Joanna Briggs Risk of Bias (JB-ROB) tool for cross-sectional analytical studies was used for bias assessment. A funnel plot was used to detect publication bias. Results: Of 20 studies, nine studies reported higher acceptance for GA than HOME; seven reported higher acceptance for HOME than GA, and the remaining four appeared inconclusive. The meta-analysis results (eleven studies) based on forest plots with fixed effects models in terms of OR (CI) indicated no statistically significant difference in the acceptance for HOME vs GA [1.03 (0.84, 1.25)], CS [0.77 (0.60, 1.00)], and PR-P [1.21 (0.92, 1.59)]. In comparison with the acceptance for HOME, CS (NO) [0.65 (0.51, 0.84)], VC [0.48 (0.39, 0.59)], TSD [0.04 (0.03, 0.05)], PR-A [0.65 (0.50, 0.84)], PS [0.28 (0.22, 0.36)], OP [0.55 (0.39, 0.78)], distraction [0.11 (0.09, 0.15)], and PR [0.06 (0.04, 0.08)] were preferred; these being statistically significant. Heterogeneity values (I2) for all comparisons were high (above 80%), with the exception of one (comparison of HOME vs OP) having 50%. ROB across studies was judged to be moderate. The publication bias using the funnel plot analysis for all studies on the basis of SE [Log (OR)] showed marked and fairly equal dispersion on either side of the central line. Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was seen in the acceptance for HOME vs GA, CS, and PR-P. BMTs such as TSD, VC, PR-A, PS, CS (NO), OP, distraction, and PR were preferred to HOME; the difference in acceptance being statistically significant. The differences in acceptance between HOME vs CS (NO) and PR-A did not remain statistically significant when random effects models were used. The heterogeneity was high, the ROB was moderate, and the publication bias was minimal.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Ripa LW, Barenie JT. Management of dental behavior in children, Littleton, Massachusetts, PSG Publishing Company, 1979.
  2. Dean JA, Avery DR, McDonald RE. McDonald and Avery's dentistry for the child and adolescent. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2016.
  3. Davis MJ, Rombom HM. Survey of the utilisation of and rationale for hand-over-mouth (HOM) and restraint in postdoctoral pedodontic education. Pediatr Dent 1979;1(2):87–90.
  4. Acs G, Burke MJ. An updated survey on the utilisation of hand over mouth (HOM) and restraint in postdoctoral pediatric dental education. Pediatr Dent 1990;12(5):298–302.
  5. Acs G, Hersch G, Testen RD, et al. A 20-year perspective on the changing use of hand over mouth (HOM) and restraint in postdoctural pediatric dental education. Pediatr Dent 2001;23(4):301–306.
  6. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Behavior guidance for the pediatric dental patient. The Reference Manual of Pediatric Dentistry. Chicago, III.: American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry; 2020. pp. 292–310.
  7. Desai SP, Shah PP, Jajoo SS, et al. Assessment of parental attitude toward different behavior management techniques used in pediatric dentistry. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2019;37(4):350–359.
  8. Eaton JJ, McTigue DJ, Fields HW Jr, et al. Attitudes of contemporary parents toward behavior management techniques used in pediatric dentistry. Pediatr Dent 2005;27(2):107–113.
  9. Muhammad S, Shyama M, Al-Mutawa SA. Parental attitude toward behavioral management techniques in dental practice with schoolchildren in Kuwait. Med Princ Pract 2011;20(4):350–355.
  10. Kamolmatayakul S, Nukaw S. Parent attitudes toward various behaviour management techniques used in pediatric dentistry in Southern Thailand. Int J Health Promot Educ 2002;40(3):75–77.
  11. Noor S, Ganapathy D, Ramanathan V. Acceptance of various behavior management techniques by parents. Drug Invention Today 2019;12:971–975.
  12. de León JL, Jimeno FG, Dalmau LB. Acceptance by Spanish parents of behaviour- management techniques used in paediatric dentistry. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2010;11(4):175–178.
  13. Venkataraghavan K, Shah J, Kaur M, et al. Pro-activeness of parents in accepting behavior management techniques: a cross-sectional evaluative study. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10(7):ZC46.
  14. Paryab M, Afshar H, Mohammadi R. Informing parents about the pharmacological and invasive behavior management techniques used in pediatric dentistry. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2014;8(2):95.
  15. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI systematic reviews. Checklist for Analytical Cross-sectional studies [updated 2017; cited 2021 September 28]. Available from: https://jbi.global/sites/default/files/2019-05/JBI_Critical_Appraisal- Checklist_for_Analytical_Cross_Sectional_Studies2017_0.pdf
  16. Boka V, Arapostathis K, Verlos N, et al. Parental acceptance of behaviour management techniques used in pediatric dentistry and its relation to parental dental anxiety and experience. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2014;15(5):333–339.
  17. Rahman MT, Kamaruddin A, Eusufzai Z, et al. Acceptability of different behaviour management techniques in paediatric dentistry: a study of Chinese, Indian and Malay parents. Int J Curr Res Rev 2021;13(4):157–161.
  18. Razavi SH, Purtaji B. Determining the behaiour management technique's acceptance of mothers referred to the department of pediatric dentistry in Qazvin (2007). JQUMS 2009;13(3):81–86.
  19. Elango I, Baweja DK, Shivaprakash PK. Parental acceptance of behaviour management techniques: a comparative study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2012;30(3):195–200.
  20. Thirunavakarasu R, Sudhan M, Ramakrishnan M. Parental acceptance towards behavioural management techniques in pediatric dentistry. J Res Med Dent Sci 2021;9(1):308–313.
  21. Alammouri M. The attitude of parents toward behavior management techniques in pediatric dentistry. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2006;30(4):310–313.
  22. Acharya S. Parental acceptance of various behaviour management techniques used in pediatric dentistry: a pilot study in Odisha, India. Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada 2017;17(1):e3728–e3730.
  23. Fúccio F, Ferreira K, Watanabe S, et al. Aceitação dos pais em relação às técnicas de manejo do comportamento utilizadas em odontopediatria. JBP 2003;6(30):146–151.
  24. Simões FXPC, Macedo TG, Coqueiro RS, et al. Percepção dos pais sobre as técnicas de manejo comportamental utilizadas em Odontopediatria. Rev Bras Odontol 2016;73(4):277–282.
  25. Abushal MS, Adenubi JO. Attitudes of Saudi parents toward behavior management techniques in pediatric dentistry. J Dent Child 2003;70(2):104–110.
  26. Jafarzadeh M, Kooshki F, Malekafzali B, Ahmadi S. Attitude of parents referred to the department of pediatric dentistry towards different behavioral management techniques used in pediatric dentistry. J Dent Sch Shahid Beheshti Univ Med Sci 2015;33(1):44–50.
  27. Jahanimoghadam F, Hasheminejad N, Horri A, et al. Does verbal explanation change parental acceptance level of different behavior management techniques in dental office? J Oral Health Oral Epidemiol 2018;7(2):80–86.
  28. Gupta D, Khajuria S. Acceptance of different behaviour management techniques used in pediatric dentistry by parents. Int J Sci Res 2019;8(11):889–891.
  29. Gauthier B. Assessing Survey Research: A Principled Approach. Quebec: Circum Network Inc. 2003.
  30. Dekkers OM, Vandenbroucke JP, Cevallos M, et al. COSMOS-E: guidance on conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies of etiology. PLoS Med 2019;16(2):e1002742. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002742
  31. Metelli S, Chaimani A. Challenges in meta-analyses with observational studies. Evid Based Ment Health 2020;23:83–87.
  32. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA 2000;283(15):2008–2012.
  33. Mueller M, D'Addario M, Egger M, et al. Methods to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies: a systematic scoping review of recommendations. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018;18(1):18–44.
  34. Massignan C, Soares JP, de Souza Peres MM, et al. Parental acceptance toward behaviour guidance techniques for pediatric dental visits: a meta-analysis. medRxiv preprint DOI: 10.1101/2020.10.13.20212191 [Accessed: 15 October 2020].
  35. Al Zoubi L, Schmoeckel J, Mustafa Ali M, et al. Parental acceptance of advanced behaviour management techniques in normal treatment and in emergency situations used in paediatric dentistry. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2019;20(4):319–323.
  36. Peretz B, Zadik D. Parents’ attitudes toward behavior management techniques during dental treatment. Pediatr Dent 1999;21(3):201–204.
  37. Ramos MM, Carrara CF, Gomide MR. Parental acceptance of behavior management techniques for children with clefts. J Dent Child 2005;72(2):74–77.
  38. Jawdekar A. Child management in clinical dentistry. Delhi; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers: 2010.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.