Minimally Invasive Interventions for Childhood Caries: A Scoping Review of Their Applicability in Public Health and Community Settings

Background/Objectives: Dental caries is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases in childhood, disproportionately affecting socially vulnerable populations. This scoping review aimed to analyze the clinical effects of selected minimally invasive materials and approaches, specifically mouthrinses, fluoride varnishes, silver diamine fluoride, and glass ionomer-based interventions, for the prevention and management of dental caries in pediatric patients, with emphasis on public health and community-based settings. Methods: This scoping review followed the Population, Concept, and Context (PCC) framework. Electronic searches were conducted up to 23 January 2026, using tailored strategies for mouthrinses, fluoride varnishes, silver diamine fluoride (SDF), and glass ionomer cements (GICs). Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. Data extraction and qualitative synthesis focused on clinical outcomes and applicability in public health contexts. Results: Fifty-five RCTs were included. Fluoride- or chlorhexidine-based mouthrinses showed potential in controlling cariogenic biofilm, with evidence primarily based on microbiological outcomes. Fluoride varnishes were associated with enamel remineralization and control of early white spot lesions, particularly in supervised programs. SDF was reported to achieve high caries’ arrest rates in cavitated dentin lesions of primary teeth, while its preventive effect on sound surfaces appeared comparable to other fluoride-based interventions. GICs were associated with acceptable clinical performance as pit-and-fissure sealants and in atraumatic restorative treatment. Conclusions: Minimally invasive dentistry (MID) approaches show promise for the prevention and management of childhood dental caries in public health and community-based settings. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the heterogeneity of interventions and outcome measures, the predominance of short-term and surrogate (microbiological) outcomes, and the absence of a formal risk-of-bias assessment. As a scoping review, the synthesis is narrative in nature, which limits the ability to draw definitive conclusions. Further studies with standardized clinical outcomes and longer follow-up are needed to strengthen the evidence.