Prophylactic third molar removal: are oral surgeons and orthodontists aligned in preventive approaches?

BACKGROUND: There is a general consensus among dental professionals regarding the extraction of impacted third molars in the presence of clinical symptoms. However, there is less agreement on the management of asymptomatic third molars. The objective of this study is to compare the perspectives of oral surgeons and orthodontists regarding the indications for the extraction of asymptomatic third molars. It is possible that healthcare professionals from different specialties may approach the extraction of these teeth in different ways. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a web-based questionnaire has been employed to collect data by inquiring about the reasons why participants prefer the extraction of asymptomatic third molars. Descriptive statistics were employed to evaluate the data obtained. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: Prophylactic extraction of partially impacted molars was more favored among the participants (P < 0.05). The orthodontists preferred prophylactic extraction due to the risk of late anterior dental crowding (LADC); however, the oral surgeons preferred pre-pregnancy extractions (P < 0.05). The extraction decision for partial impaction was higher in females when the risk of distal caries was considered. For fully impacted ones, it was higher in males when the risk of caries and pericoronitis were considered (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Orthodontists preferred extraction because of the risk of LADC and caries, while oral surgeons focused on preventing pericoronitis, pathology, focal infection, and symptoms during pregnancy. This divergence between the participants may inform the guidelines for prophylactic management of third molars. These findings may be pertinent in gender medicine. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study has been enlightening for departments to consult each other before the extraction of a patient's asymptomatic third molar.

The impact of clinical audit on antibiotic prescribing in dental practice at Taibah University Dental Hospital.

There is evidence that antibiotics are sometimes prescribed inappropriately by dental practitioners, which can lead to undesirable outcomes. This study aimed to assess the impact of a clinical audit on antibiotic prescribing practices at Taibah University Dental Hospital in Madina, Saudi Arabia. The study retrospectively analyzed antibiotic-prescribing data for pediatric patients by dental interns and faculty members over a period of 8-months. The data collected revealed that inappropriate antibiotic prescription was prevalent initially, with a total of 119 antibiotic-prescriptions issued. After implementing an action plan that included the use of guidelines and educational sessions, a second cycle of the audit was conducted over a 4-month period. During the second cycle, the number of antibiotic prescriptions significantly decreased to 58, indicating a reduction of 48%. Across both cycles, amoxicillin emerged as the most frequently prescribed antibiotic, closely followed by Augmentin. Notably, pulpal diseases and peri-radical complications were consistently ranked as the conditions with the highest number of antibiotic prescriptions in both study periods. The results suggest that the clinical audit, along with the implementation of guidelines and educational sessions, had a positive impact on antibiotic prescribing practices at Taibah University Dental Hospital, leading to a significant reduction in inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions.

Endo-Perio Lesions and Dentists' Treatment Approach: A Survey.

BACKGROUND Endo-perio lesions are a great challenge for dentists. The aim of this study was to evaluate the treatment approach of dental practitioners to endo-perio lesions by considering the current endo-perio classification. MATERIAL AND METHODS An online survey was prepared, consisting of questions about the treatment approach to 3 simulated cases with endo-perio lesions, shown on periapical radiography. Details of the patient's age, presence of systemic disease, smoking, and how the single- or multi-rooted tooth would affect the treatment plan were also included in the simulated cases presented in the survey. The survey was sent to 1500 dentists via e-mail, WhatsApp, and social media platforms. The chi-square test was used for comparison of data. Significance was evaluated at P<0.05. RESULTS In total, 338 dentists participated in the survey, including general dentists, endodontists, and periodontists. Fifty-three percent of participants stated that they would perform root canal treatment and initial periodontal treatment simultaneously, when both treatments were required. In cases classified as grade 3, most general dentists, endodontists, and periodontists answered that they would prescribe systemic antibiotics if there was diffuse extra-oral swelling (P<0.05). Moreover, in grade 3 cases, more general dentists chose the option "extraction" as the best choice, compared with endodontists and periodontists, who did not choose extraction as often (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS According to the results of this study, general dentists, endodontists, and periodontists generally follow different approaches to endo-perio lesions. A consensus is needed on this issue to develop a successful multidisciplinary approach to endo-perio lesions.

Orthodontic management of traumatized teeth: a survey among orthodontists.

BACKGROUND: Information on previous traumatic dental injuries is important as they can lead to increased complications during orthodontic treatment and impact the treatment planning and outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge of Jordanian orthodontists in orthodontic management of traumatized permanent teeth. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey among active registered orthodontists using a questionnaire distributed by hand. RESULTS: The study included 139 orthodontists. Nearly half of orthodontists treated between one to three patients with a history of traumatic dental injuries in the past 3 months. Only 43.2% of the participant asked routinely about history of trauma. A vast discrepancy in times waited before orthodontic movement and in the orthodontic management approach of traumatized teeth was noted. A statistically significant negative relationship between age and knowledge level was found (p = 0.002). A significantly higher level of knowledge was found among participants who had fellowship or board certification than those having the high diploma degree (P-0.032) and also who had treated patients with history of dental trauma in the last 3 months than those who did not (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge of the surveyed orthodontists in both the recommended observation period before orthodontic treatment and management approaches of traumatized teeth during orthodontic treatment was insufficient. Years of clinical experience significantly affected knowledge, with older participants having lower levels of knowledge. Orthodontists who treated patients with history of dental trauma in the last 3 months had significantly higher knowledge in orthodontic management of traumatized teeth. Orthodontists needs to be aware of the proper timing and strategies on orthodontic management of traumatized permanent teeth to improve the long term prognosis and to reduce further complications during orthodontic treatment through proper management.

Impact of COVID-19 on pediatric dental care in two epicenters: Italy and Brazil.

The study aimed to compare the adherence of Brazilian and Italian pediatric dentists to the biosafety measures and operative protocols recommended by the health authorities during COVID-19 pandemic and to classify the participants according to their risk of infection. An online questionnaire with 34 questions about sociodemographic and occupational data, dental practice organization, biological risk management, and clinical operative protocols was sent to Brazilian and Italian pediatric dentists using a convenience sampling strategy. Chi-square test and multivariate analysis (two-step cluster) were performed (α = 5%). Of 641 respondents (377 Brazilians and 264 Italians), most were female (94% and 70%, respectively), aged 20-39 years (63%), with over 10 years of professional experience (58% and 49%, respectively). Based on adherence to recommended biosafety measures, participants were classified as "safer" (n = 219) or "less safe" (n = 422). Adherence to recommended protocols by the majority of participants resulted in low contagion rates (Brazilians = 5%; Italians = 12.5%). Participants with extensive professional experience in the dental setting exhibited a greater tendency to implement multiple adaptations (three or more) in their practice. Most participants (Brazilians = 92%; Italians = 80.7%) adopted the recommended minimal intervention dentistry approaches, with the use of fissure sealants and the use of non-rotary instruments for caries removal the most frequently techniques used among Brazilians (36%) and Italians (66%), respectively. Two different profiles of pediatric dentists were identified based on the biosafety protocols adopted during the pandemic. In addition, changes were implemented in the dental care provided to children, with focus on the minimal intervention dentistry.

Botulinum toxin for bruxism treatment: a nationwide study among oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the use of botulinum toxin (BTX) for the treatment of bruxism in oral and maxillofacial surgery in Germany. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A dynamic online questionnaire comprising 7 to 25 questions was formulated to gather general and specific information regarding using BTX to treat bruxism. The questionnaire underwent internal and external assessments for validation. Subsequently, it was distributed to 906 oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFS) affiliated with the German Association for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (DGMKG). Weekly reminders were dispatched over four weeks to enhance response rates. Participation in the study was voluntary and anonymized. Descriptive methods were employed for data analysis. RESULTS: 107 OMFS participated in the study, yielding a response rate of 11.81%. On average, 17 patients with bruxism were per month, with 4 of these patients receiving BTX therapy. BTX administration was frequently accompanied by splints and physiotherapy (35.51% of participants). Botox® (Allergan) was the preferred BTX preparation, utilized by 40.79% and reconstituted with saline by 92.11% of participants. The masseter muscles were primarily targeted for BTX treatment (67.57% of participants), averaging 29 BTX (Allergan-) units per side. Injection points for each masseter muscle typically amounted to six per side, preferred by 30.67% of participants. Follow-up assessments post-BTX treatment were conducted regularly, predominantly after four weeks, by 36% of participants. In 8% of cases, additional BTX injections were necessary due to inadequate outcomes. Side effects were reported in 4% of cases, commonly manifesting as a non-disturbing reduction in bite force. Most participating OMFS (61.84%) using BTX for bruxism therapy regarded bruxism treatment with BTX as evidence-based. Notably, 97.37% of respondents expressed their willingness to recommend BTX-based bruxism treatment to their colleagues. Overall, the efficacy of BTX therapy for bruxism was rated as good (53.95%) and very good (40.79%). CONCLUSION: The use of BTX for the management of bruxism among OMFS in Germany has demonstrated efficacy. Substantial variances in certain facets of bruxism treatment employing BTX have been observed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Additional research endeavors are warranted to comprehensively investigate distinct elements of BTX therapy for bruxism, including the optimal dosage of BTX units and the precise localization of injection sites across various muscles.

Clear aligner therapy practices among orthodontists practicing in Canada.

BACKGROUND: The acceptability and preference for clear aligner therapy (CAT) has been increasing among orthodontists, but there is still a lack of consensus regarding CAT best practices. Consequently, this study aimed to investigate CAT practices among orthodontists practicing in Canada. METHODS: The survey was conducted among orthodontists practicing in Canada using a modified previously published survey. Sixty orthodontists participated (6.1% response rate). It consisted of 11 sections with open and closed questions related to demographic information and particularities about using or not using CAT. The survey responses were exported from REDCap to a Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, Wash) spreadsheet, then statistically analyzed using SPSS software (SPSS for Windows, version 21.0; IBM Inc., Armonk, NY, USA). The comments were categorized under themes and subthemes. Data were organized in descriptive statistics, expressing frequencies and percentages. RESULTS: Almost 30% of the orthodontist's annual caseload was treated with CAT, most frequently prescribed to adult patients. Case complexity and patient cooperation were the factors that most influenced the decision to prescribe CAT. Almost half of orthodontists reported sometimes combining CAT with adjunctive fixed appliances. CONCLUSIONS: Most orthodontists prescribe CAT, and its use is based on the malocclusion's complexity. Orthodontists who do not prescribe CAT believe that fixed appliance therapy has superior treatment outcomes.

A Cross-Sectional Survey of the Use of Clear Aligners by General Dentists in Australia.

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of the investigation was to survey clear aligner therapy (CAT) use among general dentists in Australia. A secondary aim was to evaluate the factors that influenced general dentists in Australia not to provide CAT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: General dentists registered with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency were invited to participate in a structured cross-sectional electronic survey. The survey covered demographics, preferred CAT systems and practices, relevant treatment planning and retention protocols, patient-reported CAT issues, pertinent respondent opinions, and reasons for not providing CAT. Descriptive statistics were computed via GraphPad Prism v10 (GraphPad Software Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA). RESULTS: Most of the 264 (n = 172; 65.2%) respondents indicated that they provided CAT. The majority (n = 82; 58.6%) reported that they treated between 1 and 20 patients with CAT annually. Invisalign was the most used system (n = 83; 61.2%), with 55 (41.7%), indicating that they used more than one system. Most (n = 124; 98.4%) were comfortable using CAT for mild crowding, whereas 73.4% (n = 94) were not comfortable in treating severe crowding with CAT. The median (IQR) number of patients per respondent treated with extraction of a permanent incisor or premolar was 0 (0). Issues regarding tooth positions were reportedly always or mostly in need of change in the initial treatment plan by 68.7%. Problems regarding patient compliance with CAT wear protocols (n = 67; 45.6%) and the predictability of treatment outcomes (n = 31; 21.1%) were the most identified themes of the free-text comments. Over 80% of those who did not provide CAT indicated that they preferred to refer to an orthodontist for management. CONCLUSION: Almost two-thirds of the respondents provided CAT. Invisalign was the most used system. The majority use CAT combined with nonextraction treatment. Most of those who did not provide CAT preferred to refer to an orthodontist for patient management.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Pattern of Antibiotic and Opioid Prescriptions by Dentists in Alberta, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: After the shutdown of most dental services during the COVID-19 lockdown, the oral health community was concerned about an increase in prescribing opioids and antibiotics by dentists due to patients' limited access to dental offices. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the pattern of antibiotic and opioid prescriptions by dentists in Alberta, Canada. METHODS: Data obtained from the Tracked Prescription Program were divided into antibiotics and opioids. Time periods were outlined as pre-, during-, and postlockdown (phase 1 and 2). For the number of prescriptions and average supply, each monthly average was compared to the corresponding prelockdown monthly average, using descriptive analysis. Time series analyses were conducted using regression analyses with an autoregressive error model. Data were trained and tested on monthly observations before lockdown and predicted for during- and postlockdown. RESULTS: A total of 1.1 million antibiotics and 400,000 opioids dispense were tracked. Decreases in the number of prescriptions during lockdown presented for antibiotics (n = 24,933 vs. 18,884) and opioids (n = 8892 vs. 6051). Average supplies (days) for the antibiotics (n = 7.10 vs. 7.55) and opioids (n = 3.92 vs. 4.05) were higher during the lockdown period. In the trend analyses, the monthly number of antibiotic and opioid prescriptions showed the same pattern and decreased during lockdown. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic altered the trends of prescribing antibiotics and opioids by dentists. The full impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the population's oral health in light of changes in prescribing practices by dentists during and after lockdown warrants further investigation.

The relationship between self-reported preventive and curative orientations of dentists and oral healthcare services provided to Dutch young patients: An observational study.

The aims of this study were to investigate the relationship between self-reported preventive and curative orientations of general dental practitioners (GDPs) and the oral healthcare services (OHS) they provided to patients under 18-years-old. And in addition, to determine which patient, GDP, and dental practice characteristics predicted the provision of preventive and curative care. GDPs in the Netherlands using dental software program Exquise (>2,000) were invited to participate in this study voluntarily. Participants completed a web-based questionnaire on characteristics of themselves, their dental practices, and on 20 hypothetical clinical situations concerning caries management. Based on their responses GDPS were classified for their preventive orientation, and their curative orientation. Data on the OHS provided to their young patients over the period 2013-2017 were automatically extracted from the patient files. Based on the annual frequency of provided care to regular patients over a period of 4 or 5 years, this was converted into 3 longitudinal care patterns regarding prevention and 3 longitudinal care patterns regarding curative care. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted with a multilevel approach to correct for dental practices. The 37 participating GDPs provided data for 16,229 young patients. There was not a significant relationship between self-reported preventive orientations and preventive care patterns. The self-reported middle curative orientation was a predictor of the care pattern 'curative treatment(s) in 1 year' (OR 1.23 compared to nu curative treatments; 95% CI 1.02-1.48). The self-reported high curative orientation was a predictor of 'curative treatments in several years' (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.27-2.85). Common characteristics predicting (p<0.05) both regular preventive care and curative treatments in several years were patient related: age 4-9 and 10-12, low-income neighborhood, 5 years included in study. GDP and dental practice related predictors were: the GDP could fulfill the care demand by working overtime, small dental practice (≤2,000 patients), and practice policy on the provision of care to young patients. This showed that the variation in provided care was partly supplier-driven instead of patient-centered.

Prescription writing pattern among the dental practitioners of a tertiary care hospital in Karachi.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the frequency and types of prescription errors, assess adherence to WHO prescribing indicators, and highlight the gaps in current prescribing practices of Junior dental practitioners in a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2021 to March 2021. The study included the prescriptions by house surgeons and junior postgraduate medical trainees for walk-in patients visiting the dental outpatient department. A total of 466 prescriptions were evaluated for WHO core drug prescribing indicators. The prescription error parameters were prepared by studying the WHO practical manual on guide to good prescribing and previous studies. Prescription errors, including errors of omission related to the physician and the patients, along with errors of omission related to the drug, were also noted. The statistical analysis was performed with SPSS version 25. Descriptive analysis was performed for qualitative variables in the study. RESULTS: The average number of drugs per encounter was found to be 3.378 drugs per prescription. The percentage of encounters with antibiotics was 96.99%. Strikingly, only 16.95% of the drugs were prescribed by generic names and 23.55% of drugs belonged to the essential drug list. The majority lacked valuable information related to the prescriber, patient, and drugs. Such as contact details 419 (89.9%), date 261 (56%), medical license number 466 (100%), diagnosis 409 (87.8%), age and address of patient 453 (97.2%), form and route of drug 14 (3%), missing drug strength 69 (14.8%), missing frequency 126 (27%) and duration of treatment 72 (15.4%). Moreover, the wrong drug dosage was prescribed by 89 (19%) prescribers followed by the wrong drug in 52 (11.1%), wrong strength in 43 (9.2%) and wrong form in 9 (1.9%). Out of 1575 medicines prescribed in 466 prescriptions, 426 (27.04%) drug interactions were found and 299 (64%) had illegible handwriting. CONCLUSION: The study revealed that the prescription writing practices among junior dental practitioners are below optimum standards. The average number of drugs per encounter was high, with a significant percentage of encounters involving antibiotics. However, a low percentage of drugs were prescribed by generic name and from the essential drug list. Numerous prescription errors, both omissions and commissions, were identified, highlighting the need for improved training and adherence to WHO guidelines on good prescribing practices. Implementing targeted educational programs and stricter regulatory measures could enhance the quality of prescriptions and overall patient safety.

The implementation of conscious sedation by dental professionals in Egypt: an analytical cross-sectional study.

Conscious sedation is widely considered one of the techniques most commonly used to manage anxiety in both children and adults during dental procedures. The application of procedural sedation exhibits considerable variation globally. The purpose of the study was to determine the prevalence of conscious sedation in the current situation in the dental healthcare sector in Egypt and to identify the factors influencing it. An online cross-sectional analytical survey, consisting of nine multiple choice questions, was distributed through the contact lists of national dentists and social media platforms. 163 respondents completed the survey. Regarding the use of conscious sedation, only 25 (15.3%),95% confidence interval (10-21) utilized it. The percentage of participants who used conscious sedation was higher among dentists practicing pediatric dental specialists (n = 19, 76%). Academic qualification correlates significantly with the practice of conscious sedation (P = 0.002), but this was not reflected in multiple logistic regression. Indeed, while conscious sedation is part of the dental study curriculum in Egypt, its application rate is relatively low compared to other countries. This discrepancy could be attributed to a variety of factors, including resource availability, lack of training, reflecting the need to develop strategies to improve the implementation of conscious sedation in Egyptian dental practices.

Antibiotic prescribing pattern of oral health practitioners before and during the COVID-19 pandemic at Wits Oral Health Centre.

The purpose of the study was to determine the antibiotic prescribing pattern of oral health practitioners before and during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at Wits Oral Health Centre, South Africa. A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted using a systematic random sample of 698 records of patients who were prescribed antibiotics. The records were categorised into two groups: pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 pandemic periods. For each group, data collected and analysed included variables such as patient demographics, prescriber discipline, medical history, dental condition, dental procedure, type of antibiotic, dose, frequency, and duration. Most patients in both the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 groups (70.3% and 73%, respectively) were healthy. The most common indication for prescribing antibiotics was a painful tooth (58.7%). Amoxycillin and metronidazole remain the antibiotics of choice for most dental conditions. More patients were treated with antibiotics only in the COVID-19 group than the pre-COVID-19 group (46.8% vs 33.7%). A significant proportion of the prescribed antibiotics were not indicated in both the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 groups (53.1% and 54.3%, respectively). The increased antibiotic usage during the COVID-19 period, in spite of the decrease in the number of patients consulted, underscores the need for more strategies to be implemented to strengthen antimicrobial resistance surveillance and stewardship initiatives.

Appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing for oral and dental conditions in Australian hospitals: 2013 to 2022.

OBJECTIVES: Dentists manage a variety of oral infections in clinical practice. Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing by dentists occurs frequently and antimicrobial stewardship strategies should include dentistry. The aim of this retrospective analysis of the Australian Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (Hospital NAPS) dataset, was to describe the types of oral and dental indications where antimicrobials were prescribed, and assess the guideline compliance and appropriateness of the antimicrobials in Australian hospitals. METHODS: Data from the Hospital NAPS was extracted for oral and dental indications from 2013 to 2022. The types of oral and dental indications presented, and the corresponding antimicrobials prescribed were assessed for compliance according to national prescribing guidelines, and appropriateness according to the NAPS structured algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 8,001 prescriptions for 7,477 patients were identified, from 433 hospitals. Antifungal, antibiotic and antiviral agents accounted for 84.5 %, 15.4 % and 0.03 % of prescriptions respectively. A greater proportion of antibiotics were prescribed in regional and rural areas compared to antifungals. The prescriptions assessed as compliant were 80.0 % and 44.7 % of antifungals and antibiotics respectively. Prescriptions assessed as appropriate were 84.4 % of antifungals, and 65.3 % of antibiotic prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: A wide variety of antimicrobials were used with moderate levels of compliance and appropriateness. Future interventions should include targeted education, utilisation of prescribing guidelines, and tools to diagnose and manage oral and dental conditions. Consideration can be given to adjustment of the Hospital NAPS tool to cater for oral conditions and include the provision of dental treatment in the management of these infections. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: A wide variety of oral and dental conditions are presented in Australian hospital settings, managed by a range of antibiotics and antifungals, with moderate levels of compliance to guidelines and appropriateness. Antimicrobial stewardship strategies should target and support dentistry in hospital settings.

Knowledge and awareness about temporomandibular disorder among dentists in India: Questionnaire study and review.

AIM: Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) comprise ailments involving the jaw joint (temporomandibular joint) and its associated anatomical structures. The complexity involved in TMD is primarily due to its broad spectrum of conditions, clinical signs and symptoms variability, and multifactorial etiology. Considering the above, the present study was performed to help understand the prevailing knowledge and awareness of TMD among Indian dentists in the context of the new specialty "orofacial pain". SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Questinnaire study and review. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The questionnaire was distributed using a web-based portal nationwide among Indian dentists. Dentists were invited to participate, clearly stating that the intent and purpose of the questionnaire was to record the existing knowledge and awareness concerning temporomandibular disorders among Indian dentists. The questionnaire was segregated into three sections: pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of TMDs. The questions were recorded using a Likert three-point scale (1=agree; 2=disagree; 3=not aware). 310 dentists participated in the survey, among which 105 were general dentists (BDS [Bachelor of Dental Surgery] graduates), and 205 were dentists with specialist training (MDS [Masters of Dental Surgery] graduates). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The results obtained from the study participants was used to calculate the percentage and frequency, following which tabulations were made based on graduate type and clinical experience. The values obtained from all three sections were recorded, and the responses were analysed using Pearson's Chi-Square test with statistical significance kept at P < 0.05. RESULTS: Results of the study disclosed that only 58.1% of general dentists and 46.8% of specialists were confident in handling temporomandibular disorder patients. Splint therapy was the preferred treatment modality for general dentists, whereas dentists with specialist training preferred occlusal rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: The results of the current survey indicate that Indian dentists lack sufficient training in dental schools on all three sections and face difficulty diagnosing and treating TMDs.

Potential barriers to the rational antibiotic use in dental and periodontal practice: A questionnaire-based online survey.

BACKGROUND: Dentists, through inappropriate antibiotic prescription, may contribute to the global problem of antibiotic resistance (AR). OBJECTIVES: Understanding dentists' antibiotic prescription patterns, source of knowledge, and the driving forces behind their prescription practices may be crucial for the effective implementation of the rational use of antibiotics (RUA) in dentistry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Active members of the Turkish Dental Association were invited to participate in an electronic survey comprising questions focusing on their role, knowledge and perceptions regarding RUA, the perceived barriers to adapting RUA in daily dental work, and the actual antibiotic prescription practices. The potential impact of age, gender, professional experience, and the mode of dental practice was also evaluated. Dentists' prescription practices for periodontal disease/conditions were evaluated as well. RESULTS: Based on 1,005 valid responses, there was consensus on the necessity of RUA (99.1%); however, its implementation was low. The main barriers were dentists' own safety concerns (74.4%), strong patients' demands (42.2%) and the fact that prescribing antibiotics became a professional habit (35.8%). Different educational background resulted in clear variances in everyday prescription practices. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of RUA was not sufficient and the perceived barriers had an impact on daily prescribing habits. Support for dental professionals through the efficient dissemination of evidencebased clinical guidelines and decision-making aids is likely to require additional help from professional organizations in order to actively combat AR.

Evaluation of orthodontists' attitudes and practices regarding residual resin removal methods.

INTRODUCTION: The removal of residual resins is a routine procedure in orthodontic clinics and of great importance to the final result of the treatment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the main methods of residual resin removal used by orthodontists, and the main reasons for choosing these methods. METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 21 questions: 6 relating to demographic data and the other 15 relating to two methods used to remove residual resins (drills or pliers) was sent by e-mail to orthodontists registered with the Regional Councils of Dentistry of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) within April and June, 2023. Questionnaires were sent back by 153 professionals. RESULTS: Residual resin removal is always carried out with high speed drill for 44.7% of the sample, and with low speed drill for 28.7%; 61.3% use irrigation. The multi-laminate carbide bur is used by 82.5% of orthodontists. Pliers are always used by 12.4%. Resin-removing pliers with Widia are used in 39% of cases. The use of high speed was justified by the shorter working time, and the choice of pliers was justified by the smaller damage to the tooth enamel. CONCLUSION: The most used residual resin removal method was the multi-laminate carbide bur at high speed with irrigation, justified the by shorter working time.

Comparison of factors associated with the evidence-practice gap as perceived by Japanese and Brazilian dentists.

OBJECTIVES: To identify 1) factors of the evidence-practice gap (EPG) in Japan and Brazil as perceived by dentists and compare these factors between two countries, and 2) mechanisms to close this EPG. METHODS: The study employed a cross-sectional design by administering a web-based questionnaire to 136 Japanese and 110 Brazilian dentists. The survey queried dentists' reports of which factors possibly cause an EPG, using a newly developed 20-item questionnaire. RESULTS: An international comparison of 20 items related to factors of the EPG between Japan and Brazil revealed that "Dentists' own experiences are sometimes given priority over evidence" and "Dentists' own thoughts are sometimes given priority over evidence" were common factors to both countries, with over 80 % agreement. In logistic regression, "Insufficient opportunity to learn about evidence in dental education at universities", "Evidence-based treatments are sometimes not covered by the dental insurance system", and "Insufficient evidence which helps dentists choose an appropriate treatment for a patient after careful consideration of his/her own background" were significantly associated with the EPG in Japan (p < 0.05). In Brazil, "Insufficient case reports in which evidence-based dentistry (EBD) is applied to clinical practice" and "Image-based information and devices used for diagnosis vary depending on individual dentists" were significantly associated with the EPG (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that EPG could be improved in Japan: by promoting EBD education at universities, improving the dental insurance system, and accumulating evidence according to patient background; and in Brazil: by promoting EBD case reports and standardizing diagnostic information and devices. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Two factors of EPG common to Japan and Brazil, namely the prioritization of dentists' own "experiences" and "thoughts" over evidence, are urgent issues for improving EPG. In addition, it will be necessary to address the country-specific factors of EPG that were identified in this study.

Provision of Pediatric Dental Services by Pediatric Dentists Versus General Dentists: Secondary Dental Analysis of Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys.

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to determine whether visiting only a pediatric dentist (as opposed to visiting only a general dentist) was associated with the provision of preventive dental services for a U.S.-based pediatric population (those 18 years and younger). Methods: This study analyzed pooled Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data from 2018 and 2019 to compare the use of certain preventive dental services (i.e., examination, radiographs, prophylaxis, dental sealant, and fluoride treatment) among those who reported visiting a pediatric dentist versus those who visited a general dentist. Survey procedures were used in Stata 14.0 to perform multivariable logistic regression analyses. Results: Controlling for demographic and insurance variables, children who visited only pediatric dentists had statistically significantly greater odds of receiving radiographs (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] equals 1.22; 95 percent confidence interval [95% CI] equals 1.01 to 1.48; P=0.04), fluoride treatment (AOR equals 1.57; 95% CI equals 1.30 to 1.90; P≤0.001), and sealants (AOR equals 1.63; 95% CI equals 1.24 to 2.16; P=0.001) compared to children who visited only general dentists. There was no statistically significant difference in the provision of periodic examinations and prophylaxis services. Conclusion: Based on the nationally representative data evaluated, pediatric dentists are more likely to provide more optimal preventive services than general dentists (i.e., radiographs, fluoride treatments, and sealants) to children in the United States.

What Factors May Influence a Clinician's Choice for an Implant System for Their Patients?

BACKGROUND: Clinicians have to decide which implant system to use for their patients. Factors influencing a clinician's choice of a specific implant are not well-established. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify factors that may influence clinician's choice of implant. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: This cross-sectional study used a survey instrument that was sent to dentists. Inclusion criteria included if the doctor's name was the addressee and if their website indicated they utilize implants. Exclusion criteria included if the email address was directed to individuals other than the clinician or if the respondent does not place implants as indicated by their website. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The predictor variable was the provider type (oral and maxillofacial surgeon, general dentist, prosthodontist, or periodontist). MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: The outcome variables were factors that may influence clinician's choice of implants, measured by their ranked responses. COVARIATES: Age and sex were the covariates. ANALYSES: The survey data were evaluated as group in total and separated for each provider type. Factors affecting clinical choice were ranked. A mean score was determined. Responses were evaluated using analysis of variance with significance at P value < .05 to determine if there were differences among the groups. RESULTS: After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, the final study sample consisted of 353 clinicians, of whom 230 (65.1%) responded to the survey. Factors scored as extremely or somewhat important were ranked from high to low as follows: clinical trial evidence (92%), ease of use (88%), familiarity with system (73%), restorative dentist's preference (72%), cost (63%), sales representative (59%), key opinion leader (66%), a laboratory's preference (45%), implant company providing continuing education (66%), and implant company can grow practice (65%). There were differences among providers for the factors that influence choice of implant for cost (P value = .02), sales representative (P value = .015), the key opinion leader (P value = .01), laboratory preference (P value = .002), providing continuing education (P value = .02), and implant company can grow my practice (P value = .035). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Four factors that highly influenced provider's choice of a specific implant were evidence for success, ease of use, cost, and familiarity with the implant.