OBJECTIVETo evaluate the report quality of randomized controlled trials (RCT) of oral and maxillofacial surgery in China during 2000-2009.

METHODSA comprehensive electronic search was carried out through Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and 19 kinds of journals of stomatology in China were also hand-searched. We identified RCT published between 2000 and 2009, and classified into oral and maxillofacial surgery and labeled "random" and assessed the quality of these reports using the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) statement.

RESULTS53 RCT articles were included. Reporting quality of the 53 articles was not high and the CONSORT score was 8.2 +/- 2.5.

CONCLUSIONThe reporting quality of RCT of oral and maxillofacial surgery in China is poor. The CONSORT statement should be used to standardize the reporting of RCT.

China ; Humans ; Oral Medicine ; Publishing ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; standards ; Surgery, Oral

OBJECTIVETo assess the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCT) related to dentine hypersensitivity which were published between 2000 and 2009 in nineteen Chinese stomatological journals, learn the current status and the influence factors of reporting quality of the dentine hypersensitivity RCT, and determine whether they can provide high quality evidence clinically.

METHODSA handsearching of nineteen Chinese stomatological journals to identify dentine hypersensitivity RCT which were published between 2000 and 2009 and labeled "random". Assess the reporting quality of these RCT by Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and then analyze the influence factors of reporting quality by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTSWe identified 61 dentine hypersensitivity RCT, among which 45 belonged to journals of Chinese scientific study statistical source and 16 belonged to journals of non-statistical source. The reporting quality of dentine hypersensitivity RCT was not high at large and the CONSORT score was 8.1 +/- 2.4 on average. Multiple linear regression showed that the score of improved Jadad scale (t=4.656, P=0.000) was the main influence factor of reporting quality of dentine hypersensitivity RCT. The better the intrinsic authenticity was, the higher the reporting quality would be.

CONCLUSIONCurrently, reporting quality of Chinese dentine hypersensitivity RCT needs to be improved. In order to improve the reporting quality of dentine hypersensitivity RCT, experts in stomatology should not only improve experimental design before experiments, but also write papers in accordance with CONSORT statement.

Dentin Sensitivity ; Humans ; Publishing ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic subtotal colonic bypass plus colostomy with antiperistaltic cecoproctostomy (SCBCAC) in the treatment of senile slow transit constipation. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed. Clinical data of 30 colonic slow transit constipation patients aged ≥70 years old undergoing laparoscopic SCBCAC from July 2012 to October 2016 (bypass plus colostomy group), and 28 patients undergoing laparoscopic subtotal colonic bypass with antiperistaltic cecoproctostomy (SCBAC) from February 2009 to June 2012 (bypass group) at our institute were collected. Efficacy was compared between the two procedures. Inclusion criteria: (1) meeting the Rome III diagnosis criteria for constipation; (2) confirmed diagnosis of slow transit constipation; (3) age ≥ 70 years old; (4) receiving non-surgical treatment for more than 5 years, and Wexner constipation score > 15; (5) follow-up for more than 2 years. Those with psychiatric symptoms or previous psychiatric history, obvious signs of outlet obstructive constipation, organic diseases of the colon and life-threatening cardiovascular diseases or cancer were excluded. In the bypass plus colostomy group, laparoscopy was performed via five trocars. The ileocecal junction and the ascending colon were mobilized and the ileocecal junction was pulled down to the pelvic inlet. The ascending colon was transected and the appendix was excised. The lateral peritoneum of the sigmoid colon and the rectal mesentery were dissected and the upper rectum was transected. The avil of a circular stapler was placed in the bottom of the cecum. The shaft of the stapler was placed in the rectum via the anal canal to complete end-to-side anastomosis (end rectum to lateral cecum). The end of the rectal-sigmoid colon was used for colostomy via an extraperitoneal approach to complete the operation. The following efficacy indexes were collected before surgery and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery: the number of daily bowel movements, the Wexner incontinence scale (WIS, 0-20, the lower the better), the Wexner constipation scale (WCS, 0-30, the lower the better), the gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI, 0-144, the higher score, the better), abdominal pain intensity indicated by the numerical rating scale (NRS, 0-10, the lower score, the better), and the abdominal bloating score (ABS, 0-4, the lower score, the better). The complications defined as Clavien-Dindo class II or above were observed and recorded. Results: No significant differences in preoperative WCS, WIS, GIQLI, NRS, and ABS were observed between bypass plus colostomy group and bypass group (all P>0.05). All the patients successfully underwent laparoscopic surgery and no patient in either group experienced postoperative fecal incontinence. WCS and GIQLI were significantly improved (all P<0.001) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery in both groups. At 12 months after surgery, the number of bowel movements was significantly less in bypass plus colostomy group than that in bypass group [(2.4±0.7) times vs. (3.4±1.2) times, t=4.048, P<0.001]. At 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery, the improvement of GIQLI in bypass plus colostomy group was significantly better than that in bypass group (all P<0.001). At 24 months after surgery, GIQLI in bypass plus colostomy group and bypass group was 122.3±5.3 and 92.8±16.6, respectively, with a significant difference (t=9.276, P<0.001). At 12 and 24 months after surgery, NRS in bypass plus colostomy group was significantly better than that in bypass group (both P<0.001). At 24 months after surgery, NRS in bypass plus colostomy group was 0.9±0.7, while that in bypass group was 3.7±2.7. There was a significant difference between two groups (t=5.585, P<0.001). At 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery, the improvement of ABS in bypass plus colostomy group was also significantly better than that in bypass group. At 24 months after surgery, ABS in bypass plus colostomy group was 0.6±0.6, while that in bypass group was 2.5±1.0, with a significant difference between two groups (t=8.797, P<0.001). At 1 year after surgery, barium enema examination was performed in all the patients of both groups. The barium emptying time was (21.2±3.8) hours and (95.8±86.2) hours in bypass plus colostomy group and bypass group respectively. The former group was significantly better than the latter group (t=4.740, P<0.001). Conclusions Laparoscopic SCBCAC is an effective and safe procedure for the treatment of senile slow transit constipation and can significantly improve prognosis. Its clinical efficacy is better than laparoscopic SCBAC.