Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: This paper was jointly developed by Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Quality of Life Research, Journal of Patient Reported Outcomes, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes and jointly published by Elsevier Inc, Springer Nature Switzerland AG, and BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature. The articles are identical except for minor stylistic and spelling differences in keeping with each journal's style. Either citation can be used when citing this article.

Young Infants Clinical Signs Study 8-sign Algorithm for Identification of Sick Infants Adapted for Routine Home Visits: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of its Measurement Properties.

Objective. The 8-sign algorithm adapted from the Young Infants Clinical Signs Study (YICSS) is widely used to identify sick infants during home visits (YICSS-home algorithm). We aimed to critically appraise the development and evidence of measurement properties, including sensibility, reliability, and validity, of the YICSS-home algorithm. Methods. Relevant studies were identified through a systematic literature search. Results. The YICSS-home algorithm has good sensibility. The algorithm demonstrated at least moderate inter-rater reliability and sensitivity ranging from 69% to 80%. However, the algorithm was developed among sick infants brought for care to a health facility and not initially developed for use by community health workers (CHWs) during home visits. Some important risk factors were omitted at item generation. Inter-CHW reliability and construct validity have not been estimated. Conclusion. Future research should build on the strengths of the YICSS-home algorithm and address its limitations to develop a new algorithm with improved predictive accuracy.

Personal protective equipment during COVID-19: A natural history of dental and dental hygiene regulatory guidance in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Due to the evolving nature of COVID-19, there is evidence that COVID-19-specific infection prevention and control guideline (IPCG) documents formulated for oral health care settings are also changing rapidly. To better inform future policies, a comprehensive review of all IPCG documents across different phases of restrictions for oral health care practitioners is required. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: A search was performed for documents shared from March 2020 through January 2022 on websites of oral health regulatory authorities in Canada's 10 provinces and 3 territories. The authors performed a narrative review of the identified IPCG documents for dentists (n = 78) and dental hygienists (n = 57). RESULTS: Overall findings from more than 100 IPCG documents distributed during a period of 23 months revealed that the frequency of these updates differed among jurisdictions and between the 2 oral health care practitioners (ie, dentists and dental hygienists) within the same jurisdiction. The most notable observation was the different face-covering recommendations for dentists and dental hygienists within the same jurisdiction during the same timeframe. A common document was sometimes observed for dentists and dental hygienists, however, most jurisdictions had separate IPCG documents. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The different approaches could have been justified on the basis of prevalence of COVID-19 and availability of personal protective equipment; however, there was a risk of creating confusion about IPCG best practices. The findings of this review will support decision makers when planning future development and dissemination of regulations for all oral health care practitioners.

Detecting dental caries on oral photographs using artificial intelligence: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed at evaluating the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) models in detecting dental caries on oral photographs. METHODS: Methodological characteristics and performance metrics of clinical studies reporting on deep learning and other machine learning algorithms were assessed. The risk of bias was evaluated using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. A systematic search was conducted in EMBASE, Medline, and Scopus. RESULTS: Out of 3410 identified records, 19 studies were included with six and seven studies having low risk of biases and applicability concerns for all the domains, respectively. Metrics varied widely and were assessed on multiple levels. F1-scores for classification and detection tasks were 68.3%-94.3% and 42.8%-95.4%, respectively. Irrespective of the task, F1-scores were 68.3%-95.4% for professional cameras, 78.8%-87.6%, for intraoral cameras, and 42.8%-80% for smartphone cameras. Limited studies allowed assessing AI performance for lesions of different severity. CONCLUSION: Automatic detection of dental caries using AI may provide objective verification of clinicians' diagnoses and facilitate patient-clinician communication and teledentistry. Future studies should consider more robust study designs, employ comparable and standardized metrics, and focus on the severity of caries lesions.

Teledentistry use during the COVID-19 pandemic: perceptions and practices of Ontario dentists.

BACKGROUND: Teledentistry has demonstrated to expedite oral health consultations, diagnosis, and treatment planning while mitigating COVID-19 transmission risk in dental offices. However, the use of teledentistry by clinicians remains suboptimal. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the perceptions and practices of teledentistry among dentists during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada, and identify associated factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study using an online 39 item survey was conducted among Ontario dentists in December 2021. The questionnaire inquired about socio-demographic attributes, as well as perceptions of teledentistry use during the pandemic, and its future application. Descriptive statistics including frequency distribution of categorical variables and univariate analysis of continuous variables were conducted. Chi-square test was used determine the associations between professionals' attributes such as age, gender, years of practice, and location of practice, and respondents use of teledentistry. SPSS Version 28.0 was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 456 dentists completed the survey. The majority were general dentists (91%), worked in private practices (94%), were between 55 and 64 years old (33%), and had over 16 years of professional experience (72%). Approximately 49.3% reported using teledentistry; 13% started before the pandemic, and 36% during the pandemic. The most common reason for non-utilization was a lack of interest (54%). Respondents identified patient triage, consultation, and patient education as the three most important uses of teledentistry. Female dentists (p < 0.05), dentist working in private practice (p < 0.05), and those who worked in a single dental office (p < 0.05) adopted teledentistry more during the pandemic. Respondents who accessed more resources were more likely to report greater utilization of teledentistry, while those who reported being unconformable with teledentistry (p < 0.05) reported less utilization. Additionally, participants who reported feeling comfortable discussing teledentistry with others (p < 0.05), were more inclined to use it in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Participants expressed mixed perceptions toward teledentistry with more than half indicating it is reliable for patient triaging and patient follow-ups. Despite the increased utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic, participants' lack of interest in teledentistry emerged as a barrier to its use. More education and knowledge dissemination about teledentistry's areas of application and technical aspects of use can increase interest in this tool, which may lead to a greater uptake by dental professionals.

Reporting of absolute and relative risk measures in oral health and cardiovascular events studies: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the magnitude of risk of health events, such as cardiovascular diseases (CVD), related to poor oral health, both relative and absolute risk measures should be reported. Our aim was to investigate the extent to which absolute and relative measures of risk are reported in longitudinal studies that assess the association between oral health indicators (OHIs) and CVD. METHODS: A systematic search of longitudinal studies investigating the association of any OHI with CVD was carried out using the Embase, Medline and Cochrane library databases. The search covered each database from its inception date to August 2021. Data about reporting relative and absolute risks of the relationship between CVD and OHI from the abstract were extracted. If the relative risk for OHIs and CVD was reported in the abstract, then the underlying absolute risks were searched from the full text, and it was assessed whether it was similarly adjusted for confounding than was the relative risk in the abstract. RESULTS: One hundred-six articles were included. From these, 85 (80%) studies reported the association of OHIs and CVD with one or more relative risks in the abstract. Of those 85 studies, the underlying absolute risks were accessible or calculable from the abstract or full text of 60 studies. However, of these 60 studies, in only 10 (12%), the underlying absolute risks were similarly adjusted, as were the relative risks in the abstract. The absolute risks of CVD by OHIs were rarely reported without corresponding relative risks in the abstract (n = 2, 2%). Median absolute risk difference in the CVD risk between exposure levels to which the first relative risk in the abstract referred was 1.8% (interquartile range 0.6-4.6, n = 63). CONCLUSIONS: Focusing on relative risks over absolute risks was a common practice in literature. Reporting similarly adjusted underlying absolute risks of relative risks was rare in most studies, despite those being helpful for comprehending the magnitude of CVD-risk increase related to poor oral health. Current reporting practices could lead to an overinterpretation of risk increase of CVD related to poor oral health.

A Review of "Optimal Fallow Period" Guidance Across Canadian Jurisdictions.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding how different countries have responded to mitigate the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) transmission in dental offices is important. This article describes the different approaches taken towards optimal fallow periods in Canadian jurisdictions. METHODS: We searched publicly available information from dentist and dental hygiene regulator websites across the 10 provinces and 3 territories in Canada. We also searched for guidance documents on dental associations' websites or through personal communication with government officials. We extracted and tabulated information on fallow period recommendations or guidance, when available. RESULTS: Nine jurisdictions (6 provinces and all 3 territories) acknowledge or provide guidance on fallow periods following aerosol-generating procedures. Among those who have provided guidance regarding a fallow period, recommendations follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance if the air changes per hour (ACH) in the dental operatory is known. CONCLUSION: The evidence for deciding on optimal fallow period is limited and still being explored, resulting in substantial variation across Canadian jurisdictions. A focus on developing scientific evidence relevant to dentistry and assimilating existing science is crucial to establishing consistency and uniformity in information to deliver safe oral health care services.

The influence of living conditions and individual behaviors on the oral-systemic disease connection: a cross-sectional analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the extent to which living conditions and individual behaviors influence the association between oral health status and systemic disease outcomes in Ontario, Canada's most populated province. METHODS: A secondary data analysis of Ontario data from the Canadian Community. Health Survey 2013/14 was undertaken. Separate analyses were conducted for participants aged 35-59 years (n = 11,858) and 60+ years (n = 11,273). A series of regression models were constructed to examine the association between self-reported oral health status and systemic disease outcomes (arthritis, diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stroke). Models were adjusted by proxies of living conditions (income, education, ethnicity, country of birth, employment, and food security) and individual behaviors (smoking status, alcohol use, tooth brushing, life stress, physical activity, sense of belonging). Percent attenuation between models was calculated to determine the extent of the living condition-behavior impact. RESULTS: In both age groups, the prevalence of arthritis and high blood pressure was the highest, followed by heart disease. There was variation in percent attenuation by age group and outcome. Among participants aged 35-59 years, living conditions had a greater impact on the oral-systemic relationship, while individual behaviors played a greater role in this association among adults aged 60+ years. CONCLUSION: There is an association between oral and systemic diseases; however, after accounting for living conditions and individual behaviors, this relationship was attenuated. This highlights the need to address upstream and midstream factors that are common to oral and systemic conditions.

Using a Resident-Led School Outreach Program to Improve Knowledge of All-Terrain Vehicle Safety.

BACKGROUND: During the past decade, all-terrain vehicle (ATV)-related injuries treated in US emergency departments decreased by 33%, down to approximately 100,000 injuries in 2016. In comparison, the number of children evaluated for ATV injuries in the Children's of Alabama emergency department more than doubled between 2006 and 2016, counter to the national trend. The American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines state that ATV operators should be at least 16 years old; however, children younger than 16 continue to represent almost one-third of all ATV-related injuries nationwide, and nearly all of the injuries to children in Alabama. METHODS: Using surveillance data from the Children's of Alabama hospital electronic medical record database, several Alabama counties near Birmingham were identified as having an increased number of children with ATV-related injuries in 2016. The Safety Tips for ATV Riders (STARs) program, developed in Iowa, was provided to middle school students in these counties by pediatric residents. Surveys were anonymously administered to children before and after the program and included information about demographics, knowledge of safe ATV practices, and the likelihood of using the education afterward. RESULTS: In total, 525 students participated in January 2019; their ages ranged from 11 to 15 years and the proportion of males and females was equivalent. More than 50% of the children reported riding ATVs in the last 12 months, and of these riders, 47% reported never wearing a helmet when riding. Initially, only 20% of the overall participants knew ATVs were not intended for passengers, 20% knew the recommended engine size for their age, and 57% knew that Alabama law prohibits riding on public roads. After education, this increased to 91%, 90%, and 89%, respectively. Before the STARs program, only 6% knew all three correct answers, whereas 80% answered all of the questions correctly on the postprogram survey. After the program, 34% reported they were very likely/likely to use this information in the future. CONCLUSIONS: The STARs program dramatically improved short-term ATV safety knowledge, and many participants reported they were likely to subsequently use the safe practices presented. School-based programs, such as STARs, may help increase ATV safety awareness and change behaviors in high-risk age groups. This training may be successfully provided by various motivated individuals, including medical residents.

Changes in income-related inequalities in oral health status in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Oral health inequalities impose a substantial burden on society and the healthcare system across Canadian provinces. Monitoring these inequalities is crucial for informing public health policy and action towards reducing inequalities; however, trends within Canada have not been explored. The objectives of this study are as follows: (a) to assess trends in income-related inequalities in oral health in Ontario, Canada's most populous province, from 2003 to 2014, and (b) to determine whether the magnitude of such inequalities differ by age and sex. METHODS: Data representative of the Ontario population aged 12 years and older were sourced from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) cycles 2003 (n = 36,182), 2007/08 (n = 36,430) and 2013/14 (n = 41,258). Income-related inequalities in poor self-reported oral health (SROH) were measured using the Slope Index of Inequality (SII) and Relative Index of Inequality (RII) and compared across surveys. All analyses were sample-weighted and performed with STATA 15. RESULTS: The prevalence of poor SROH was stable across the CCHS cycles, ranging from 14.1% (2003 cycle) to 14.8% (2013/14 cycle). SII estimates did not change (18.7-19.0), while variation in RII estimates was observed over time (2003 = 3.85; 2007/08 = 4.47; 2013/14 = 4.02); differences were not statistically significant. SII and RII were lowest among 12- to 19-year-olds and gradually higher among 20- to 64-year-olds. RII was slightly higher among females in all survey years. CONCLUSION: Absolute and relative income-related inequalities in SROH have persisted in Ontario over time and are more severe among middle-aged adults. Therefore, oral health inequalities in Ontario require attention from key stakeholders, including governments, regulators and health professionals.

Developing a coding taxonomy to analyze dental regulatory complaints.

BACKGROUND: As part of their mandate to protect the public, dental regulatory authorities (DRA) in Canada are responsible for investigating complaints made by members of the public. To gain an understanding of the nature of and trends in complaints made to the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario (RCDSO), Canada's largest DRA, a coding taxonomy was developed for systematic analysis of complaints. METHODS: The taxonomy was developed through a two-pronged approach. First, the research team searched for existing complaints frameworks and integrated data from a variety of sources to ensure applicability to the dental context in terms of the generated items/complaint codes in the taxonomy. Second, an anonymized sample of complaint letters made by the public to the RCDSO (n = 174) were used to refine the taxonomy. This sample was further used to assess the feasibility of use in a larger content analysis of complaints. Inter-coder reliability was also assessed using a separate sample of letters (n = 110). RESULTS: The resulting taxonomy comprised three domains (Clinical Care and Treatment, Management and Access, and Relationships and Conduct), with seven categories, 23 sub-categories, and over 100 complaint codes. Pilot testing for the feasibility and applicability of the taxonomy's use for a systematic analysis of complaints proved successful. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting coding taxonomy allows for reliable documentation and interpretation of complaints made to a DRA in Canada and potentially other jurisdictions, such that the nature of and trends in complaints can be identified, monitored and used in quality assurance and improvement.

Do health systems cover the mouth? Comparing dental care coverage for older adults in eight jurisdictions.

Oral health is an important component of general health, yet there is limited financial protection for the costs of oral health care in many countries. This study compares public dental care coverage in a selection of jurisdictions: Australia (New South Wales), Canada (Alberta), England, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United States. Drawing on the WHO Universal Coverage Cube, we compare breadth (who is covered), depth (share of total costs covered), and scope (services covered), with a focus on adults aged 65 and older. We worked with local experts to populate templates to provide detailed and comparable descriptions of dental care coverage in their jurisdictions. Overall most jurisdictions offer public dental coverage for basic services (exams, x-rays, simple fillings) within four general types of coverage models: 1) deep public coverage for a subset of the older adult population based on strict eligibility criteria: Canada (Alberta), Australia (New South Wales) and Italy; 2) universal but shallow coverage of the older adult population: England, France, Sweden; 3) universal, and predominantly deep coverage for older adults: Germany; and 4) shallow coverage available only to some subgroups of older adults in the United States. Due to the limited availability of comparable data within and across jurisdictions, further research would benefit from standardized data collection initiatives for oral health measures.

Persistent but narrowing oral health care inequalities in Canada from 2001 through 2016.

BACKGROUND: Similar to the United States, inequality in oral health care use is longstanding in Canada. It remains unclear whether this inequality is improving or worsening. In this study, the authors report on income-related inequality in dental visits in Canada and across its provinces over time and interprovincial inequality in dental visits among Canadian provinces. METHODS: The authors used 7 nationally representative health surveys of the Canadian population and collected data from 2001 through 2016. The magnitude of income-related inequality was measured using the slope index of inequality and relative index of inequality. Interprovincial inequality was examined using a number of indexes including the Theil index. RESULTS: Income-related inequality in dental visits was present in all survey years, with people in higher income groups reporting higher dental visit prevalence rates. However, results from the slope index of inequality and relative index of inequality showed a steady decline, meaning there was a decrease in the magnitude of inequality over time. Absolute and relative inequality decreased by 7.2% and 22.9% from 2000 through 2016, respectively. A similar decline was observed across most Canadian provinces. Interprovincial differences in dental visits also decreased over time. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be persistent but narrowing income-related inequality in dental visits in Canada and across its provinces over time. In addition, it appears that Canadian provinces are becoming more equal in terms of dental services use. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Narrowing income-related inequality in dental visits in Canada is promising, suggesting a more equal distribution of dental visits. However, unequal use of dental services remains an issue affecting the Canadian population.

Providing dental insurance can positively impact oral health outcomes in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Universal coverage for dental care is a topical policy debate across Canada, but the impact of dental insurance on improving oral health-related outcomes remains empirically unexplored in this population. METHODS: We used data on individuals 12 years of age and older from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2013-2014 to estimate the marginal effects (ME) of having dental insurance in Ontario, Canada's most populated province (n = 42,553 representing 11,682,112 Ontarians). ME were derived from multi-variable logistic regression models for dental visiting behaviour and oral health status outcomes. We also investigated the ME of insurance across income, education and age subgroups. RESULTS: Having dental insurance increased the proportion of participants who visited the dentist in the past year (56.6 to 79.4%, ME: 22.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 20.9-24.7) and who reported very good or excellent oral health (48.3 to 57.9%, ME: 9.6, 95%CI: 7.6-11.5). Compared to the highest income group, having dental insurance had a greater ME for the lowest income groups for dental visiting behaviour: dental visit in the past 12 months (ME highest: 17.9; 95% CI: 15.9-19.8 vs. ME lowest: 27.2; 95% CI: 25.0-29.3) and visiting a dentist only for emergencies (ME highest: -11.5; 95% CI: - 13.2 to - 9.9 vs. ME lowest: -27.2; 95% CI: - 29.5 to - 24.8). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that dental insurance is associated with improved dental visiting behaviours and oral health status outcomes. Policymakers could consider universal dental coverage as a means to support financially vulnerable populations and to reduce oral health disparities between the rich and the poor.

The use and misuse of antibiotics in dentistry: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: To describe antibiotic prescribing behaviors in dentistry, including clinical and nonclinical indications for their use, the type and regimen of antibiotics prescribed, and factors influencing their prescription, the authors conducted a scoping review. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors conducted a scoping review of published literature by searching multiple databases. Key search terms included dentist, antibiotic, antimicrobial, antibacterial, prophylaxis, prescription, pattern, habit, knowledge, and practice. Two authors independently reviewed titles and abstracts by using detailed eligibility criteria. The authors placed no restrictions on study design or publication year. The authors qualitatively assessed studies by using a modified version of the Center for Evidence-Based Management's critical appraisal of a survey checklist. RESULTS: The authors identified 1,912 studies but considered only 118 studies eligible for review. Most included studies were either cross-sectional surveys (81 studies) or prescription audits (25 studies) from various geographic locations. Publication dates ranged from 1982 through 2017. The authors examined prophylactic and therapeutic antibiotic use in 48 and 29 studies, respectively. Another 29 studies examined the use of both prophylactic and therapeutic antibiotics in dentistry. Overall, dentists prescribed a wide variety of antibiotic regimens for various clinical and nonclinical indications. Dentists have acquired their prescribing knowledge from a variety of sources and have changed their antibiotic prescribing practices throughout their careers for various reasons. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Considering the seriousness of antibiotic resistance, the authors highlight trends in antibiotic prescribing practices, characterize factors contributing to the use and misuse of antibiotics in dentistry, provide insight into the importance of antibiotic stewardship in the oral health setting, and encourage dentists to reflect on their antibiotic prescription practices.