Search

Objectives: This study pertains to a secondary data analysis aimed at determining differences between oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFSs) and dentists handling dental extractions without an evident clinical indication., Study Design: A survey of 18 questions was conducted among 256 OMFSs in the Netherlands and a random sample of 800 dentists Respondents could answer the questions in writing or online. The data was collected in the period from November 2019 to January 2020, during which two reminders were sent. Analysis of the data took place via descriptive statistics and Chi Square test., Results: The response rate was 28.1% (n = 72) for OMFSs and 30.3% (n = 242) for dentists. In the past three years, 81.9% (n = 59) of the OMFSs and 68.0% (n = 164) of the dentists received a request for extraction without a clinical indication. The most common reasons were financial and severe dental fear (OMFSs: 64.9 and 50.9% vs dentists: 77.4 and 36.5%). Dentists were significantly more likely (75.6%, n = 114) than OMFS (60.7%, n = 34) to comply with their last extraction request without a clinical indication. Almost none of them regretted the extraction afterwards. As for the request itself, it was found that 17.5% (n = 10) of the OMFSs and 12.5% (n = 20) of the dentists did not check for patients' mental competency (p = 0.352)., Conclusions: Given that most of the interviewed dental professionals complied with non-dental extraction requests when such extractions are ethically and legally precarious, recommendations for handling such requests are greatly needed., Competing Interests: The authors whose names are listed certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript., (Copyright: © 2023 Broers et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Objective: This scoping review aims to identify complex health interventions (CHI's) to prevent early childhood caries (ECC), explore the level of complexity of the identified CHI's, and explore the details of their development, evaluation, and implementation., Introduction: Many interventions to prevent ECC have multiple interacting components and can be seen as CHI's. Recent reviews on these interventions have found inconclusive effects, which may be due to differences in the development, evaluation, and implementation of CHI's., Inclusion Criteria: This scoping review will consider clinical trials reporting CHI's to prevent ECC that starts during pregnancy or in the first year of life. Studies in the English language will be included regardless of the country of origin, sociocultural setting, or context., Methods: This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. An initial search of PubMed identified keywords and Medical Subject Headings terms. A second search of PubMed, Embase, Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Wiley/Cochrane Library will follow. Two independent reviewers will perform title and abstract screening, retrieve and review full-text studies, and extract data. The reference lists of all included sources will be screened for additional CHI's or relevant publications about a specific CHI. Data charting will be utilised based on study characteristics and intervention complexity. A 39-item instrument will be used to explore the details in the description of the CHI's development, evaluation, and implementation. The results will be presented in tables, visual outputs, and a narrative summary in response to the review questions., Discussion: The proposed review will generate evidence which may provide a direction for the future design of studies on CHI's to prevent ECC and more complete information for those who want to adopt successful interventions to prevent ECC., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objectives: To assess the oral health of older people who visit the community dental practice from both the dentists' and the patients' perspective., Materials and Methods: In this exploratory cross-sectional study the oral health of Dutch community dwelling older people was assessed. A representative sample of general dental practitioners was asked to randomly and prospectively select one older patient and describe this patient using a specially-developed registration form; in addition the patient was requested to complete a questionnaire. The oral health of older people was described from the perspective of the dentists and the perspective of the older people themselves based on the definition of oral health from the World Dental Federation (FDI]. Relations between oral health of older people and dentist and older patient characteristics were analysed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (rho) and an ordinal regression model., Results: In total, 923 dentists were asked to participate in the study; data was available for 39.4% dentist-patient pairs. Dentists assessed the oral health of older patients as good or acceptable in 51.4% of the cases while this was the case in 76.2% of older patients themselves. The assessment of the dentist gets more negative with high treatment intensity and with older patients having certain diseases and more medication, while the assessment is more positive for older patients who visit the dentist on a regular basis. Older people's assessment of their oral health gets more negative by being female and with high treatment intensity, having certain diseases and higher use of medication., Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: Chronically illness as expressed by the number of diseases and the use of medication, seems to be a risk factor for poor oral health. Older patients themselves assess their oral health differently, mostly more positive, than their dentist., Competing Interests: No, the authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

FDI World Dental Federation, founded as Fédération Dentaire Internationale, has taken the initiative to develop the Oral Health Observatory, a mobile application to conduct oral health surveys worldwide. The aim is to collect reliable standardized international data on oral health and oral health care via a network of dentists. A proof of concept study project was set up in the Netherlands to test the methodology and to validate the approach. Data about caries, gingivitis, oral self-care and oral health related quality of life were analysed and compared to datasets validated in other studies. The Android app embeds three questionnaires addressing oral health history, status and patient behaviour. One questionnaire was completed by the patient and two by the dentist. The proof of concept study involved two phases: in the first phase, five dentists, regular participants in KNMT-surveys, evaluated the usability of the app; after the first phase, the app was adjusted for a second phase. For this phase an extra 15 dentists were recruited from a group of 20 other dentists: five of them declined to participate. Attention was paid to ensuring there was a proportional representation of gender, age and region. In the second phase the five first and 15 new participants collected data on up to a maximum of 38 patients. Data from this 653 patients correspond with results from previously published surveys on the prevalence of caries and gingivitis in the Netherlands. Hence demonstrating an association between caries and gingivitis with oral self-care, problems eating and experiencing oral pain. This proof of concept study shows that the app makes it possible to collect reliable information on oral health in a short period of time. Both dentists and patients evaluated the methodology as user-friendly. Altogether, the results of this proof of concept study are promising.