Advancing Evidence-Based Pediatric Dentistry: Current challenges and future directions

*Corresponding author: KUMARI NEHA JHA Copyright © 2025 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0. Advancing Evidence-Based Pediatric Dentistry: Current challenges and future directions KUMARI NEHA JHA * Lecturer, Department of Pediatric and preventive dentistry, Seema dental college and hospital, Rishikesh. World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 2025, 24(01), 223-228 Publication history: Received on 01 September 2025; revised on 10 October 2025; accepted on 13 October 2025 Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.30574/wjbphs.2025.24.1.0893 Abstract Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) in pediatric dentistry integrates scientific research, clinical expertise, and patient preferences to optimize care for children. While EBP fosters advances in preventive, behavioral, and restorative approaches, its implementation is hampered by gaps in training, access, and infrastructure. This essay critically explores EBP’s principles, current applications, ongoing barriers, and future opportunities, emphasizing strategies for equitable adoption across varying resource contexts. Keywords: Evidence-Based Dentistry; Pediatric Dentistry; Caries Management; Preventive Dentistry; Silver Diamine Fluoride (SDF); Minimal Intervention Dentistry; Teledentistry; Global Oral Health 1. Introduction Pediatric dentistry occupies a pivotal role in oral healthcare, providing specialized attention to children’s unique developmental needs and setting the foundation for lifelong oral health. The paradigm has shifted from tradition and expert opinion to Evidence-Based Practice (EBP); a decision framework that combines the best available research evidence with clinical expertise and the values and preferences of children and their caregivers¹,²,³. EBP is not a rigid recipe; rather, it is a process for formulating answerable clinical questions, finding and appraising the relevant literature, and applying it to individualized care in partnership with families ¹, ². The rationale for EBP in pediatric dentistry is especially compelling. Children ’ s oral tissues are developing; their behaviors and coping skills differ from adults; and treatment acceptance depends heavily on parents or guardians. Caries and periodontal conditions influence growth, speech, nutrition, school performance, and psychosocial well-being. Understanding the dynamic, biofilm-mediated nature of caries has reframed both prevention and management from drill-and-fill to risk-based, minimally invasive strategies⁵. Yet despite widespread endorsement of EBP in guidelines and curricula, uneven uptake persists, particularly where access to journals, trained personnel, or clinical infrastructure is limited⁴. 2. Evolution of Evidence-Based Dentistry For decades, dentistry specially pediatric dentistry leaned on expert consensus and clinical tradition. The modern EBP movement in medicine, articulated by Sackett and colleagues, accelerated in the 1990s and quickly permeated dental education and policy¹. The American Dental Association (ADA) and American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD) responded with structured reviews, recommendations, and best-practice statements to guide clinicians at the chairside²,³,⁴. World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 2025, 24(01), 223-228 224 High-impact examples include the diffusion of pit-and-fissure sealants and fluoride varnish. The ADA’s evidence-based guideline for sealants demonstrated that properly placed resin sealants effectively prevent and arrest pit-and-fissure caries⁶, while Cochrane analyses confirmed fluoride varnish efficacy in children and adolescents⁷. The emergence and validation of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) for non-surgical caries control broadened the pediatric armamentarium, particularly for fearful children and those with limited access to conventional care⁸. In restorative dentistry, the Hall technique sealing carious primary molars under preformed metal crowns without caries removal gained support from randomized trials as a child-friendly, reliable option⁹. Vital pulp therapy evolved as biocompatible materials such as mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) replaced historically popular agents like formocresol10, while studies in selective/incomplete caries removal showed reduced complications without compromising outcomes¹¹. These clinical shifts aligned with the broader philosophy of minimal intervention dentistry (MID), emphasizing disease control, remineralization, and tissue preservation¹², and were consolidated in guidelines on nonrestorative treatments for caries¹³. 3. Principles of Evidence-Based Practice in Pediatric Dentistry EBP rests on three interdependent pillars: • Best available evidence from systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and high-quality observational studies; • Clinical expertise to integrate evidence with context and judgment; and • Patient/family values and preferences to ensure care is acceptable, feasible, and ethical.1,2,10. Operationally, clinicians use frameworks like PICO (Patient/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) to structure questions, search efficiently, and appraise validity and applicability². Pediatric care adds layers of complexity: developmental stage, behavior, fear/anxiety, and family culture all affect treatment selection and sequencing. An intervention with strong evidence may still require adaptation if a child cannot tolerate lengthy chairtime, has special healthcare needs, or if parents have concerns about costs, appearance, or materials⁴. The “best” decision is therefore evidence-consistent, developmentally appropriate, and co-created with families. 4. Current Applications of EBP in Pediatric Dentistry 4.1. Preventive Dentistry Caries risk assessment underpins patient-centered prevention. Strong evidence supports pit-and-fissure sealants, fluoride varnish, and SDF in reducing or arresting early lesions⁷⁶⁸. Sealants prevent occlusal caries in at-risk pits and fissures when moisture control and technique are optimized⁶. Fluoride varnish delivers high fluoride concentration with minimal ingestion risk and demonstrated caries reduction in both primary and newly erupted permanent teeth⁷. SDF application arrests cavitated lesions in primary teeth and buys time until definitive restorative care is possible, especially helpful for very young or behaviorally challenged children⁸. Beyond these, critical reviews and professional recommendations strengthen the role of fluorides across delivery modes, including varnish, gels, and rinses ³, ⁶, ⁷. A biologic appreciation of caries as a dynamic, multifactorial disease with a balance of demineralization and remineralization within a dysbiotic biofilm guides risk-tailored preventive plans ⁵, ⁸. 4.2. Behavior Guidance Managing behavior and anxiety is central to pediatric outcomes. Non-pharmacologic strategies (tell-show-do, positive reinforcement, distraction, modeling) remain first-line, refined by decades of clinical experience and research15. When needed, pharmacologic approaches (nitrous oxide/oxygen, oral moderate sedation) and advanced techniques are guided by stringent safety evidence and protocolized monitoring; the EAPD provides comprehensive sedation guidance for pediatric patients14. The overarching aim is compassionate care that maximizes cooperation while minimizing distress and risk. 4.3. Restorative and Pulp Therapy EBP supports modern restorative choices from glass ionomer cements with fluoride release to resin composites and stainless steel crowns for multi-surface lesions or high-risk children. In pulp therapy, clinical and histologic outcomes with MTA and similar calcium silicate materials indicate superior biocompatibility and success compared with traditional medicaments10. Converging evidence favors selective caries removal to avoid pulp exposures and reduce postoperative complications¹¹ while aligning with MID principles¹² and nonrestorative options¹³ where appropriate. World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 2025, 24(01), 223-228 225 4.4. Community and Public Health Evidence shows population-level strategies can shift caries trajectories. School-based fluoride mouth-rinsing reduces caries in areas with limited access to fluoridated water or dental services16. Teledentistry extends screening, triage, and specialist support to remote regions, improving access and continuity of care17. Public health initiatives combining prevention, education, and early referrals are especially valuable for high-risk groups18. 4.5. Challenges in Implementing EBP 4.5.1. Limited Pediatric-Specific Evidence Pediatric RCTs can be difficult to execute due to ethical considerations, recruitment challenges, and smaller sample sizes. Consequently, clinicians often extrapolate from adult data, which can be inappropriate for developing dentitions or child behavior contexts16. Strengthening pediatric trial capacity and reporting remains a priority. 4.5.2. Time and Access Barriers Clinicians—particularly in solo or rural practice—report insufficient time to search, appraise, and implement literature. Subscription paywalls can further impede access²². Chairside access to high-quality summaries and decision-support tools can mitigate these constraints. 4.5.3. Resistance to Change Practice patterns may lag behind emerging evidence due to habit, perceived risk of change, or uncertainty about applicability. Multifaceted implementation strategies like education, audit and feedback, academic detailing that is promising for changing clinician behavior 19,20. 4.5.4. Socioeconomic and Cultural Factors Parental beliefs, costs, and community practices (including skepticism about fluorides or crowns) can conflict with recommendations. Addressing social inequalities in oral health requires policies that reduce financial and structural barriers and culturally sensitive communication²¹. 4.5.5. Educational Gaps Surveys indicate variability in EBP knowledge and confidence among students and new graduates18. Integrating critical appraisal, statistics, and knowledge translation into predoctoral curricula and reinforcing these competencies in residency and continuing education can improve readiness²². 4.5.6. Systemic Disparities (Low-Resource Settings) Health systems with limited financing, workforce shortages, and competing priorities (nutrition, infectious disease) struggle to prioritize pediatric oral health. Global surveillance highlights persistent burdens and inequities, especially in lowand middle-income countries23,24. Practical frameworks are needed to bridge policy and chairside realities. 4.6. EBP in Low-Resource Settings A major test of EBP’s universality is its feasibility where resources are scarce. Access barriers (journal paywalls, limited internet, language), infrastructure deficits (few clinics, scarce rotary instruments), and workforce limitations constrain conventional treatments26. EBP in these contexts prioritizes effective, low-cost, minimally invasive care that can be delivered in community settings. • Basic Package of Oral Care (BPOC): WHO aligned BPOC underscores prevention, pain relief, and simple restorations deliverable by mid-level providers, with emphasis on affordability and scalability25. • Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART): Using hand instruments and high-viscosity glass ionomer, ART is evidence-supported for managing cavitated lesions outside traditional clinics, including schools and field settings27. • Silver Diamine Fluoride (SDF): SDF arrests caries efficiently and inexpensively; trials spanning diverse populations support its use when conventional restorations are delayed or impractical28. Implementation protocols (e.g., simplified SDF pathways) can standardize training and enhance safety29. • School-based fluoride programs: Supervised mouth-rinsing and education reduce caries where professional care is scarce16,25. World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 2025, 24(01), 223-228 226 • Teledentistry and mobile clinics: Remote triage, asynchronous image sharing, and periodic mobile visits extend specialist guidance and continuity of care into rural communities17,29. These interventions exemplify contextualized EBP the same commitment to outcomes and safety, but adapted to cost, logistics, and cultural realities. 4.7. Opportunities 4.7.1. Technology and Decision Support Digital tools can compress the evidence-to-chairside gap. Artificial intelligence (AI) for image analysis and risk prediction can augment diagnosis and standardize triage, while integrated clinical decision support can surface summarized evidence at the point of care30. When responsibly validated and implemented, such tools can reduce variation and increase adherence to guidelines. 4.7.2. Minimally Invasive, Child-Centered Care Minimum intervention caries management: from non-operative lesion control to selective caries removal, prioritizes comfort and tissue conservation³¹. The Hall technique (sealing under a preformed metal crown without drilling) and ART are especially helpful for young, anxious, or special-needs children and for outreach or low-resource contexts9,27,32. These strategies align with family-centered values (shorter visits, less anesthesia) and can improve acceptance. 4.7.3. Global Guidelines and Open Access Regularly updated guidance from AAPD, EAPD, and WHO streamlines implementation and facilitates local adaptation4,14,23,25. Open-access summaries and registries can democratize knowledge, reducing reliance on paywalled journals². Embedding quality improvement and audit and feedback cycles in clinics supports sustained change20. 4.7.4. Policy and Prevention Evidence-aligned policies like water or salt fluoridation where appropriate, school-based sealant and fluoride programs, and incentives for early dental visits—shift population risk21,23,25. At the household level, daily habits remain powerful: increased toothbrushing frequency correlates with lower caries burden³³. 4.7.5. Education and Workforce Strengthening EBP teaching through inquiry-based learning, journal clubs, and structured critical appraisal improves competence and confidence18,22. Interprofessional collaboration with pediatricians, nurses, and community health workers amplifies reach for prevention and early referral. 4.8. Future Directions • Better Pediatric Evidence: More high-quality RCTs and pragmatic trials are needed across diverse settings, including LMICs, to close extrapolation gaps and reflect real-world constraints22,34. • Standards and Transparency: Wider use of core outcome sets, CONSORT-aligned reporting, and open data will improve comparability and trust in pediatric trials and reviews34. • Digital Integration: AI-assisted risk tools, caries detection, and workflow nudges can bring evidence to the chairside in real time; provided algorithms are transparent, unbiased, and prospectively validated30 • Curricular Reform: Embedding EBP longitudinally; question formulation, statistical literacy, critical appraisal, and implementation science will prepare graduates for lifelong learning18,22. • Global Oral Health Goals: Aligning pediatric dentistry with global oral health targets and universal health coverage can mobilize financing and workforce planning, prioritizing prevention and equity⁴⁰. 5. Conclusion EBP has reshaped pediatric dentistry from restorative repair to risk-based, minimally invasive, and family-centered care. The benefits like improved safety, predictability, efficiency, and equity are substantial. Yet gaps remain in evidence generation, access, training, and implementation, especially in low-resource contexts. Closing these gaps requires context-sensitive translation: pairing robust science with feasible protocols, workforce innovation, and policies that make prevention the default. With strategic use of technology, global guidance, and community programs, pediatric World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 2025, 24(01), 223-228 227 dentistry can deliver on EBP’s promises that every child receives care that is not only effective but also acceptable, accessible, and equitable. References [1] Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996;312(7023):71–2. [2] American Dental Association. Evidence-based dentistry: an overview. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005;136(3):295–302. [3] Ismail AI, Bader JD, ADA Council on Scientific Affairs. Evidence-based dentistry in clinical practice. J Am Dent Assoc. 2004;135(1):78–83. [4] American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Best practices: Behavior guidance for the pediatric dental patient. Pediatr Dent. 2021;43(6):292–310. [5] Featherstone JD. The continuum of dental caries—evidence for a dynamic disease process. J Dent Res. 2004;83(Spec No C):C39–42. [6] Wright JT, Crall JJ, Fontana M, Gillette EJ, Nový BB, Dhar V, et al. Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants. J Am Dent Assoc. 2016;147(8):672–82.e12. [7] Marinho VC, Higgins JPT, Sheiham A, Logan S. Fluoride varnishes for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;(3):CD002279. [8] Crystal YO, Marghalani AA, Ureles SD, Wright JT, Sulyanto R, Divaris K, et al. Use of silver diamine fluoride for dental caries management in children and adolescents. Pediatr Dent. 2017;39(5):E135–45. [9] Innes NPT, Evans DJP, Hall N. The Hall technique: a randomized controlled clinical trial of a novel method of managing carious primary molars in general dental practice. Br Dent J. 2007;203(6):E13. [10] Fuks AB. Vital pulp therapy with new materials in primary teeth: new directions and treatment perspectives. Pediatr Dent. 2008;30(3):211–9. [11] Schwendicke F, Meyer-Lueckel H, Dörfer CE, Paris S. Failure of incomplete caries removal: a randomized controlled trial. J Dent Res. 2013;92(4):306–11. [12] Frencken JE, Peters MC, Manton DJ, Leal SC, Gordan VV, Eden E. Minimal intervention dentistry for managing dental caries—a review. Int Dent J. 2012;62(5):223–43. [13] Slayton RL, Urquhart O, Araujo MWB, Fontana M, Guzmán-Armstrong S, Nascimento MM, et al. Evidence-based clinical practice guideline on nonrestorative treatments for carious lesions. J Am Dent Assoc. 2018;149(10):837– 49.e19. [14] European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD). Guidelines on sedation in paediatric dentistry. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2017;18(3):241–9. [15] Sheller B. Challenges of managing child behavior in the 21st century. Pediatr Dent. 2004;26(2):111–3. [16] Ide R, Mizoue T, Tsukiyama Y, Ikeda A. Evaluation of a school-based fluoride mouth-rinsing programme in a remote island community. Int Dent J. 2007;57(2):85–90. [17] Estai M, Kruger E, Tennant M. Teledentistry: a systematic review of the literature. J Telemed Telecare. 2016;22(6):323–9. [18] Straub-Morarend CL, Marshall TA, Holmes DC, Finkelstein MW. Evidence-based practice knowledge, perceptions, and behavior: a multi-institutional study of U.S. dental students. J Dent Educ. 2016;80(4):430–8. [19] Preshaw PM. Addressing the challenges in implementing evidence-based dentistry. Prim Dent J. 2015;4(3):38– 42. [20] Clarkson JE, Bonetti D, Ramsay CR, Eccles MP, Johnston M, Steen IN, et al. Changing clinicians ’behavior: a randomized controlled trial of audit and feedback in primary dental care. J Dent Res. 2008;87(7):640–4. [21] Watt RG, Listl S, Peres MA, Heilmann A. Social inequalities in oral health: from evidence to action. Geneva: International Centre for Oral Health Inequalities Research & Policy; 2015. [22] DiNardo AR, Sutton T, Mullan PB, Moser K, Mack K, Hartig JR, et al. Enhancing evidence-based dentistry skills in predoctoral dental students. J Dent Educ. 2021;85(4):511–8. World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 2025, 24(01), 223-228 228 [23] Petersen PE. The World Oral Health Report 2003: continuous improvement of oral health in the 21st century. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2003;31(Suppl 1):3–24. [24] Yee R, Sheiham A. The burden of restorative dental treatment for children in Third World countries. Int Dent J. 2002;52(1):1–9. [25] Frencken JE, Holmgren CJ. Basic package of oral care (BPOC) — lessons learned and future challenges. Br Dent J. 2004;196(11):661–6. [26] Mickenautsch S. Evidence-based dentistry in low-resource settings. SADJ. 2009;64(6):256–8. [27] Holmgren CJ, Roux D, Doméjean S. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART): for managing caries in children and adults. Dent Update. 2013;40(4):289–96. [28] Gao SS, Zhao IS, Hiraishi N, Duangthip D, Mei ML, Lo ECM, Chu CH. Clinical trials of silver diamine fluoride in arresting caries. JDR Clin Trans Res. 2016;1(3):201–10. [29] Benzian H, Monse B, Belizario V, Schratz A, Sahin M, van Palenstein Helderman W. Public health in action: effective school health needs renewed international attention. Glob Health Action. 2012;5:14870. [30] Chen Y, Wong HM, McGrath CP. Artificial intelligence in dentistry: applications and challenges. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2020;49(5):20190385. [31] Innes NP, Schwendicke F. Minimum intervention caries management: outcomes and opportunities. Br Dent J. 2017;223(3):185–91. [32] Holmgren C, Feres M, Innes N. The Hall technique: evidence and clinical use. Dent Update. 2016;43(2):153–60. [33] Kumar S, Tadakamadla J, Johnson NW. Effect of toothbrushing frequency on incidence and increment of dental caries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2016;95(11):1230–6. [34] Patel J, Cobourne MT, Aggarwal V. The use of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in orthodontics: a scoping review. Eur J Orthod. 2020;42(1):12–9. [35] Kirthiga M, Murugan M, Saikia A, Kirubakaran R. Risk factors for early childhood caries: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies. Pediatr Dent. 2019;41(2):95–112. [36] Twetman S. Caries prevention with fluorides: a critical review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2015;73(6):407–15. [37] American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. Evidence-based clinical recommendations for professionally applied topical fluoride. J Am Dent Assoc. 2013;144(11):1279–91. [38] Selwitz RH, Ismail AI, Pitts NB. Dental caries. Lancet. 2007;369(9555):51–9. [39] Horst JA, Ellenikiotis H, Milgrom P. UCSF protocol for caries arrest using silver diamine fluoride. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2016;16(1):74–92. [40] World Health Organization. Global oral health status report: Towards universal health coverage for oral health by 2030. Geneva: WHO; 2022.