Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jan 13;9(1):e19958.
doi: 10.2196/19958.

Mobile Apps for Dental Caries Prevention: Systematic Search and Quality Evaluation

Affiliations

Mobile Apps for Dental Caries Prevention: Systematic Search and Quality Evaluation

Rebecca Chen et al. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. .

Abstract

Background: Dental caries is the most common multifactorial oral disease; it affects 60% to 90% of the global population. Dental caries is highly preventable through prevention behaviors aimed at improving oral hygiene, adequate fluoride usage, and dietary intake. Mobile apps have the potential to support patients with dental caries; however, little is known about the availability, target audience, quality, and features of these apps.

Objective: This review aims to systematically examine dental caries prevention apps; to describe their content, availability, target audience, and features; and to assess their quality.

Methods: We systematically identified and evaluated apps in a process paralleling a systematic review. This included a search strategy using search terms; an eligibility assessment using inclusion and exclusion criteria focused on accessibility and dental caries self-management behaviors, including oral hygiene, dietary intake, and fluoride usage; data extraction on app characteristics, including app store metrics; prevention behavior categorization; feature identification and description; a quality appraisal of all apps using the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) assessment tool; and data comparison and analysis.

Results: Using our search strategy, we retrieved 562 apps from the Google Play Store and iTunes available in Australia. Of these, 7.1% (40/562) of the apps fit our eligibility criteria, of which 55% (22/40) targeted adults, 93% (37/40) were free to download, and 65% (26/40) were recently updated. Oral hygiene was the most common dental caries prevention behavior domain, addressed in 93% (37/40) of the apps, while dietary intake was addressed in 45% (18/40) of the apps and fluoride usage was addressed in 42% (17/40) of the apps. Overall, 50% (20/40) of the apps addressed only 1 behavior, and 38% (15/40) of the apps addressed all 3 behaviors. The mean MARS score was 2.9 (SD 0.7; range 1.8-4.4), with 45% (18/40) of the apps categorized as high quality, with a rating above 3.0 out of 5.0. We identified 21 distinctive features across all dental caries prevention behaviors; however, the top 5 most common features focused on oral hygiene. The highest-ranking app was the Brush DJ app, with an overall MARS score of 4.4 and with the highest number of features (n=13). We did not find any apps that adequately addressed dental caries prevention behaviors in very young children.

Conclusions: Apps addressing dental caries prevention commonly focus on oral hygiene and target young adults; however, many are not of high quality. These apps use a range of features to support consumer engagement, and some of these features may be helpful for specific patient populations. However, it remains unclear how effective these apps are in improving dental caries outcomes, and further evaluation is required before they are widely recommended.

Keywords: dental caries; mobile applications; oral hygiene; self-management.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic steps of the systematic review and quality evaluation. MARS: Mobile App Rating Scale.
Figure 2
Figure 2
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flowchart of apps identified through the systematic search.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Percentage of all apps that addressed each prevention factor.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Categorization of apps according to the number and types of prevention factors addressed. (The outer rim indicates the number of prevention factors each app addressed. The inner rim shows the combination of the types of prevention factors that each app addressed).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Top 5 most common features found in apps.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Number of features compared with the MARS quality rating scale for each app. MARS: Mobile App Rating Scale.

References

    1. Kassebaum NJ, Bernabé E, Dahiya M, Bhandari B, Murray CJL, Marcenes W. Global burden of untreated caries: a systematic review and metaregression. J Dent Res. 2015 May;94(5):650–8. doi: 10.1177/0022034515573272. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pitts NB, Zero DT, Marsh PD, Ekstrand K, Weintraub JA, Ramos-Gomez F, Tagami J, Twetman S, Tsakos G, Ismail A. Dental caries. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017 May 25;3:17030. doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2017.30. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Phantumvanit P, Makino Y, Ogawa H, Rugg-Gunn A, Moynihan P, Petersen PE, Evans W, Feldens CA, Lo E, Khoshnevisan MH, Baez R, Varenne B, Vichayanrat T, Songpaisan Y, Woodward M, Nakornchai S, Ungchusak C. WHO global consultation on public health intervention against early childhood caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2018 Jun;46(3):280–7. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12362. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Peres MA, Macpherson LM, Weyant RJ, Daly B, Venturelli R, Mathur MR, Listl S, Celeste RK, Guarnizo-Herreño CC, Kearns C, Benzian H, Allison P, Watt RG. Oral diseases: a global public health challenge. Lancet. 2019 Jul 20;394(10194):249–260. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31146-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Al Rawahi SH, Asimakopoulou K, Newton JT. Theory based interventions for caries related sugar intake in adults: systematic review. BMC Psychol. 2017 Jul 25;5(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s40359-017-0194-z. https://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40359-017-0194-z - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types