Clinicians use general practice guidelines as a source of support for their intervention, but how much confidence should they place on these recommendations? How much confidence should patients place on these recommendations? Various instruments are available to assess the quality of evidence of research, such as the revised Wong scale (R-Wong) which examines the quality of research design, methodology and data analysis, and the revision of the assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR), which examines the quality of systematic reviews.The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group developed an instrument called the GRADE system in order to grade the quality of the evidence in studies and to evaluate the strength of recommendation of the intervention that is proposed in the published article. The GRADE looks at four factors to determine the quality of the evidence: study design, study quality, consistency, and directness. After combining the four components and assessing the grade of the evidence, the strength of recommendation of the intervention is established. The GRADE, however, only makes a qualitative assessment of the evidence and does not generate quantifiable data.In this study, we have quantified both the grading of the quality of evidence and also the strength of recommendation of the original GRADE, hence expanding the GRADE. This expansion of the GRADE (Ex-GRADE) permits the creation of a new instrument that can produce tangible data and possibly bridge the gap between evidence-based research and evidence-based clinical practice.

Bulk-fill (BF) dental resin composites are made to be polymerized in increments of up to 5 mm rather than the 2 mm increment recommended for conventional composites. This project aimed to determine microhardness (MH) profiles of BF resin composites at different depths and varying light cure (LC) distances from the light source in an attempt to mimic varying clinical situations. Forty-eight cylindrical specimens (4 mm diameter and 6 mm height) were prepared from 3 BF composites: Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill (TBF), Filtek One Bulk-Fill (FBF), and Sonic-Fill 2 (SF2). Four different distances (0, 2, 4, and 6 mm) from the LC unit were investigated. Vickers MH was measured at the top and bottom of the samples and at every 1 mm, by creating 3 indentations at each depth. The bottom-top microhardness ratio (MHR) and percentage reduction in MHR were also measured. Data was analyzed using mixed-model repeated-measure ANOVA at 0.05 significance level. The main variables effects “material, LC distance, and depth” were significant (p < 0.001). Increasing LC distance and the depth of the tested BF significantly affected Vickers MH and MHR. None of the tested BF materials had sufficient MHR at the depths of 4–6 mm. SF2 showed the least MHR reduction.

Dental Bulk-Fill Composites (BFCs) and Bulk-Fill Flowables (BFFs) were introduced in the market to facilitate efficient bulk filling of cavities up to 5 mm. The aim of this study was to synthesize the literature investigating their polymerization efficiency. A comprehensive search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library from 2010 to January 2019 was performed using the medical subject headings. Screening of the titles, abstracts and full text was performed. Data extraction for relevant information was done on the included studies. Clinically relevant parameters were selected to present the study estimates (meta-analysis) using a random effects model for polymerization efficiency (Degree of Conversion (DC) and Depth of Cure (DoC)). Twenty one studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis reporting seven BFCs and nine BFFs. Ten materials reported acceptable DC values of above 55% and ten materials reported adequate DoC values. Most of the stated materials reported adequate DC and DoC values in at least one investigation with BFFs showing higher and more acceptable values compared to packable BFCs. It is suggested that future studies be carried out using a standard methodology following the ISO 4049 standard and manufacturer’s instructions to compare results.

Infection with the human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV) and the resulting acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) alter not only cellular immune regulation but also the bone metabolism. Since cellular immunity and bone metabolism are intimately intertwined in the osteoimmune network, it is to be expected that bone metabolism is also affected in patients with HIV/AIDS. The concerted evidence points convincingly toward impaired activity of osteoblasts and increased activity of osteoclasts in patients with HIV/AIDS, leading to a significant increase in the prevalence of osteoporosis. Research attributes these outcomes in part at least to the ART, PI, and HAART therapies endured by these patients. We review and discuss these lines of evidence from the perspective of translational clinically relevant complex systematic reviews for comparative effectiveness analysis and evidence-based intervention on a global scale.