Search

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the scope of experience, roles, and challenges that librarians face in participating in dental and oral health systematic and scoping reviews to inform outreach efforts to researchers and identify areas for librarian professional development. Methods: The authors developed a twenty-three-item survey based on the findings of two recent articles about health sciences librarians' roles and challenges in conducting systematic and scoping reviews. The survey was distributed via electronic mailing lists to librarians who were likely to have participated in conducting dental systematic and scoping reviews. Results: While survey respondents reported participating in many dental reviews, they participated more commonly in systematic reviews than in scoping reviews. Also, they worked less commonly on dental and oral health reviews than on non-dental reviews. Librarian roles in dental reviews tended to follow traditional librarian roles: all respondents had participated in planning and information retrieval stages, whereas fewer respondents had participated in screening and assessing articles. The most frequently reported challenges involved the lead reviewer or review team rather than the librarians themselves, with time- and methodology-related challenges being most common. Conclusions: Although librarians might not be highly involved in dental and oral health systematic and scoping reviews, more librarian participation in these reviews, either as methodologists or information experts, may improve their reviews' overall quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The prescribing practices of dental professionals may play an important role in the opioid epidemic. The authors performed a scoping review of the current original research literature on dental professionals' prescribing practices for opioid analgesics published from 2000 through 2017. Types of Studies Reviewed. With the use of a modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach, the inclusion criteria entailed published articles written in English that had an opioid focus, had a dental health care professional prescriber, entailed a US setting, were peer reviewed, had an identified data source, were not review articles, and were not opinion articles. Five databases were searched to identify relevant literature. Results. Of 221 articles, 18 met the inclusion criteria. Eight distinct and mutually exclusive themes emerged from these studies: impact of patient demographic characteristics on opioid prescribing, comparison of opioid prescribing by different provider type, quantity of opioids prescribed and consumed, types of opioids prescribed by dental professionals, assessment of self-reported opioid prescribing, opioid prescriptions by procedure, impact of pharmacy integration into dental practice, and implementation of risk mitigation strategies. Conclusions and Practical Implications. There is a surprising paucity of research that investigated the prescribing patterns of dentists. Available research suggests that dental practice does not always align with proposed guidelines for opioid prescribing. Some studies that explored interventions found changes in prescribing, suggesting the potential benefit of developing practical strategies targeted to dental providers who prescribed opioids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]