背景：光动力疗法用于牙髓治疗的参数选择，如波长，能源,申请时间,和会话的数量可以基于程序和患者的特征而变化。向不熟悉文献的临床医生提供科学证据支持的信息是必要的。因此，本研究旨在为恒牙牙髓治疗中使用光动力疗法综合临床方案。
方法：使用文献检索和评估指南研究和评估工具（AGREEII）确定了具有高方法学质量的协议。一种经过验证的质量评估工具。对这些研究的建议进行了综合,并提交给专家组进行评价和适应,并使用德尔菲法评估共识。
结果：对抗菌光动力疗法在牙髓治疗中应用的文献分析显示，先前已经报道了具有良好证据和临床建议水平的临床试验，两项研究被确定为A1A的临床推荐水平和A的证据水平。
结论：在专家的第二轮评估中，书面方案被认为是令人满意的，并且具有适当的内容有效性。这项研究中包含的研究主要是解释性的，强调需要务实的设计，以提高临床适用性的程度。
BACKGROUND: The choice of parameters in Photodynamic Therapy for endodontic treatment, such as wavelength, energy, application time, and number of sessions can vary based on the characteristics of the procedure and the patient. Providing information supported by scientific evidence in an accessible way to clinicians who are unfamiliar with the literature is necessary. Thus, this study aimed to synthesize a clinical protocol for the use of photodynamic therapy in endodontics in permanent teeth.
METHODS: Protocols with high methodological quality were identified using a literature search and the Appraisal of
Guidelines Research and Evaluation Instrument (AGREE II), a validated tool for assessing quality. The recommendations of these studies were synthesized and submitted to a group of experts for evaluation and adaptation, and
consensus was assessed using the Delphi methodology.
RESULTS: The analysis of the literature on the application of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in endodontics showed that clinical trials with good levels of evidence and clinical recommendations have been reported previously, with two studies identified as having a clinical recommendation level of A1A and an evidence level of A.
CONCLUSIONS: The written protocol was considered to be satisfactory and as having appropriate content validity during the second round of evaluation by the experts. The studies included in this research were predominantly explanatory in nature, highlighting the need for pragmatic designs to increase the degree of clinical applicability.
