Search

Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) device (QrayCam Pro, AIOBIO, Seoul, Republic of Korea) in detecting and differentiating the severity of posterior proximal and occlusal primary caries. Materials and methods: The study included a total of 120 teeth in 60 patients (of both genders, aged between 21 and 38 years) between January and March 2024, one carious tooth and one sound tooth were selected at random in each patient. All occlusal surfaces were evaluated in accordance with the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) Nyvad Criteria, using the visual tactile method. The ICDAS employs a scoring system ranging from 0 to 6, while the Nyvad Criteria employs a similar scoring system. Addionally, the depth of the proximal lesions was scored (0–6) using bite-wing radiography. The quantitative values representing the maximum loss of fluorescence (∆Fmax) and the maximum change in the ratio of red and green fluorescence (∆Rmax) were obtained using the Q-ray Clinical software v 1.45. To assess the validity, the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) were calculated. Spearman correlation coefficient was used to investigate the correlation between the findings of the traditional and QLF examination methods. Results: The AUROC values for both ∆Fmax and ∆Rmax were found to be excellent. The sensitivity of QrayCam Pro was found to be 84–88.6%, while the specificity was 100%. The correlation analysis demonstrated a strong correlation between scores obtained from the traditional examination and the QLF values. Conclusions: Based on the findings of this study, QrayCam Pro exhibits potential as a valuable additional tool for not only detecting caries but also for assessing their severity and activity. Clinical relevance: This study revealed that QrayCam Pro might be suggested as a precise tool for enhancing caries detection and assessment compared to traditional methods. By providing quantitative data on caries severity and activity, it enables more informed treatment decisions, potentially optimizing outcomes for patients.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental condition impacting children and adults. Current treatments are limited and there is increasing interest in the use of mindfulness, which is growing in popularity. Previous systematic reviews have typically focused on specific ages, outcome measures or interventions. The current review aimed to take a more comprehensive approach. Title and abstract searches were performed in five databases for randomized and non-randomized controlled trials or pre-post studies with participants with an ADHD diagnosis or a score above a clinically relevant cut-off on a validated ADHD measure. Studies had to measure symptoms of ADHD, global or social functioning. Extraction of key information including participant status (i.e., diagnosis, scale scores, comorbidities, medication use), study design, and outcome measures was conducted. Effect sizes (Hedge’s g) were calculated and where a measure had been used in at least three studies with the same population, meta-analyses were considered. Twenty-nine studies were initially identified, with seven deemed poor quality and removed from further analysis leaving, 22 studies containing data from 1237 children and adults with ADHD along with data from 525 family members. The data indicate possible benefits of mindfulness on self-compassion, quality of life, wellbeing, depression, and anxiety. The findings also suggest that mindfulness may also improve ADHD symptoms, executive function, problematic behaviours, and emotional dysregulation, although results vary by age of patient and measures used. Parent stress and parenting style have received limited attention, highlighting the need for more studies in these areas. Whilst the data presented suggest that mindfulness may be beneficial, the evidence base is not as strong as the popularity of the approach. Many of the studies lacked blind assessment, adequate randomization, or suitable control conditions. As such high-quality controlled studies considering medication, other psychosocial interventions, use of active and in active controls and comorbidity as well as longer follow-up periods, are needed to confirm this.