Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism.

OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to present and describe the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB), an instrument that was developed to provide a multidimensional evaluation of bruxism status, comorbid conditions, aetiology and consequences. METHODS: The rationale for creating the tool and the road map that led to the selection of items included in the STAB has been discussed in previous publications. RESULTS: The tool consists of two axes, specifically dedicated to the evaluation of bruxism status and consequences (Axis A) and of bruxism risk and etiological factors and comorbid conditions (Axis B). The tool includes 14 domains, accounting for a total of 66 items. Axis A includes the self-reported information on bruxism status and possible consequences (subject-based report) together with the clinical (examiner report) and instrumental (technology report) assessment. The Subject-Based Assessment (SBA) includes domains on Sleep Bruxism (A1), Awake Bruxism (A2) and Patient's Complaints (A3), with information based on patients' self-report. The Clinically Based Assessment (CBA) includes domains on Joints and Muscles (A4), Intra- and Extra-Oral Tissues (A5) and Teeth and Restorations (A6), based on information collected by an examiner. The Instrumentally Based Assessment (IBA) includes domains on Sleep Bruxism (A7), Awake Bruxism (A8) and the use of Additional Instruments (A9), based on the information gathered with the use of technological devices. Axis B includes the self-reported information (subject-based report) on factors and conditions that may have an etiological or comorbid association with bruxism. It includes domains on Psychosocial Assessment (B1), Concurrent Sleep-related Conditions Assessment (B2), Concurrent Non-Sleep Conditions Assessment (B3), Prescribed Medications and Use of Substances Assessment (B4) and Additional Factors Assessment (B5). As a rule, whenever possible, existing instruments, either in full or partial form (i.e. specific subscales), are included. A user's guide for scoring the different items is also provided to ease administration. CONCLUSIONS: The instrument is now ready for on-field testing and further refinement. It can be anticipated that it will help in collecting data on bruxism in such a comprehensive way to have an impact on several clinical and research fields.

The financial and quality of life impact of urgent dental presentations: A cross-sectional study.

AIM: This study aimed to: (i) calculate personal financial costs associated with urgent dental attendance; and (ii) investigate the pain-related disability and quality of life impact of dental conditions which result in urgent dental attendance. METHODOLOGY: Data were collected from those presenting with urgent dental conditions to an out-of-hours dental service, a dental emergency clinic (DEC) and five primary care general dental practices across North-East England. A pre-operative questionnaire explored the impact of urgent dental conditions on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) using Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) and a modified Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS). OHIP-14 yields a maximum score of 56, with a higher score indicating a lower OHRQoL. Personal financial costs were summed to provide a total. These included travel, appointment fees, childcare costs, medication use and time away from work. Data were analysed using one-way anova and multivariable modelling. RESULTS: In total, 714 participants were recruited. The mean OHIP-14 score was 25.73; 95% CI [24.67, 26.79], GCPS CPI was 71.69; 95% CI [70.09, 73.28] and GCPS interference was 49.56; 95% CI [47.24, 51.87]. Symptomatic irreversible pulpitis was the most frequently managed dental emergency and was associated with the highest mean OHIP-14 score (31.67; 95% CI [30.20, 33.15]). The mean personal financial cost of urgent dental care (UDC) was £85.81; 95% CI [73.29, 98.33]. Differences in travel time (F[2, 691] = 10.24, p < .001), transport costs (F[2, 698] = 4.92, p = .004), and appointment time (F[2, 74] = 9.40, p < .001) were significant between patients attending an out-of-hours dental service, DEC and dental practices for emergency care, with a DEC being associated with the highest costs and dental practices the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: Diseases of the pulp and associated periapical disease were the most common reason for patients to present for UDC and were the most impactful in terms of OHRQoL and pain in the present sample. Personal financial costs are significant from urgent dental conditions, with centralized services increasing the burden to patients of attending appointments.

The development of the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB): An international road map.

This paper summarises the background reasoning and work that led to the selection of the items included in the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB), also introducing the list of items. The instrument is currently being tested for face validity and on-field comprehension. The underlying premise is that the different motor activities included in the bruxism spectrum (e.g. clenching vs. grinding, with or without teeth contact) potentially need to be discriminated from each other, based on their purportedly different aetiology, comorbidities and potential consequences. Focus should be on a valid impression of the activities' frequency, intensity and duration. The methods that can be used for the above purposes can be grouped into strategies that collect information from the patient's history (subject-based), from the clinical assessment performed by an examiner (clinically based) or from the use of instruments to measure certain outcomes (instrumentally based). The three strategies can apply to all aspects of bruxism (i.e. status, comorbid conditions, aetiology and consequences). The STAB will help gathering information on many aspects, factors and conditions that are currently poorly investigated in the field of bruxism. To this purpose, it is divided into two axes. Axis A includes the self-reported information on bruxism status and potential consequences (subject-based report) together with the clinical (examiner report) and instrumental assessment (technology report). Axis B includes the self-reported information (subject-based report) on factors and conditions that may have an etiological or comorbid role for bruxism. This comprehensive multidimensional assessment system will allow building predictive model for clinical and research purposes.

Oral splints for patients with temporomandibular disorders or bruxism: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Splints are a non-invasive, reversible management option for temporomandibular disorders or bruxism. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of splints remain uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of splints for patients with temporomandibular disorders or bruxism. This evidence synthesis compared (1) all types of splint versus no/minimal treatment/control splints and (2) prefabricated versus custom-made splints, for the primary outcomes, which were pain (temporomandibular disorders) and tooth wear (bruxism). REVIEW METHODS: Four databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched from inception until 1 October 2018 for randomised clinical trials. The searches were conducted on 1 October 2018. Cochrane review methods (including risk of bias) were used for the systematic review. Standardised mean differences were pooled for the primary outcome of pain, using random-effects models in temporomandibular disorder patients. A Markov cohort, state-transition model, populated using current pain and Characteristic Pain Intensity data, was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for splints compared with no splint, from an NHS perspective over a lifetime horizon. A value-of-information analysis identified future research priorities. RESULTS: Fifty-two trials were included in the systematic review. The evidence identified was of very low quality with unclear reporting by temporomandibular disorder subtype. When all subtypes were pooled into one global temporomandibular disorder group, there was no evidence that splints reduced pain [standardised mean difference (at up to 3 months) -0.18, 95% confidence interval -0.42 to 0.06; substantial heterogeneity] when compared with no splints or a minimal intervention. There was no evidence that other outcomes, including temporomandibular joint noises, decreased mouth-opening, and quality of life, improved when using splints. Adverse events were generally not reported, but seemed infrequent when reported. The most plausible base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was uncertain and driven by the lack of clinical effectiveness evidence. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed splints becoming more cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of ≈£6000, but the probability never exceeded 60% at higher levels of willingness to pay. Results were sensitive to longer-term extrapolation assumptions. A value-of-information analysis indicated that further research is required. There were no studies measuring tooth wear in patients with bruxism. One small study looked at pain and found a reduction in the splint group [mean difference (0-10 scale) -2.01, 95% CI -1.40 to -2.62; very low-quality evidence]. As there was no evidence of a difference between splints and no splints, the second objective became irrelevant. LIMITATIONS: There was a large variation in the diagnostic criteria, splint types and outcome measures used and reported. Sensitivity analyses based on these limitations did not indicate a reduction in pain. CONCLUSIONS: The very low-quality evidence identified did not demonstrate that splints reduced pain in temporomandibular disorders as a group of conditions. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether or not splints reduce tooth wear in patients with bruxism. There remains substantial uncertainty surrounding the most plausible incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. FUTURE WORK: There is a need for well-conducted trials to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of splints in patients with carefully diagnosed and subtyped temporomandibular disorders, and patients with bruxism, using agreed measures of pain and tooth wear. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017068512. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Treatment options for people experiencing temporomandibular disorders (pain and/or restricted movement in and around the jaw joint) include splints, which are removable appliances, often similar to a mouthguard. They are provided to patients to help ease pain in the mouth, face or jaws. They are also used to manage the symptoms of temporomandibular disorders, such as frequent headaches/migraines, clicking jaws, restricted mouth-opening or tooth wear from the grinding of teeth (bruxism). There are many types of splints. This research looked at the evidence addressing the primary question of whether or not splints work (regardless of type of splint) in reducing the pain associated with temporomandibular disorders and/or tooth wear, and if they offered value for money. Patients were involved in the research to ensure that the question and the outcomes that were measured were appropriate. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to find all randomised controlled trials including patients with temporomandibular disorders or bruxism. Online databases of research publications were searched, and these searches were checked, to identify relevant trials. All stages of the review process were undertaken to the highest standards by two people, independently and in duplicate, using well-respected and recognised Cochrane methods. We conducted a value-for-money assessment, comparing the trial data with the costs of splints to see if splints are a cost-effective use of NHS funding. There was no evidence that splints reduced pain when compared with not wearing a splint or when compared with a minimal treatment (like jaw exercises, advice or education) in patients with temporomandibular disorders. The evidence was assessed as being of very low quality; therefore, it remains unclear whether or not splints are good value for money, or if they should be paid for by the NHS. This research showed that more well-conducted trials on temporomandibular disorder patients are needed.

Towards a Standardized Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB)-Overview and general remarks of a multidimensional bruxism evaluation system.

The aim of the present paper was to give an overview of the general project and to present the macrostructure of a comprehensive multidimensional toolkit for the assessment of bruxism, viz. a bruxism evaluation system. This is a necessary intermediate step that will be detailed in a successive extended publication and will ultimately lead to the definition of a Standardized Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB) as the final product. Two invitation-only workshops were held during the 2018 and 2019 General Session & Exhibition of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR) meetings. Participants of the IADR closed meetings were split into two groups, to put the basis for a multidimensional evaluation system composed of two main axes: an evaluation Axis A with three assessment domains (ie subject-based, clinically based and instrumentally based assessment) and an aetiological/risk factors Axis B assessing different groups of factors and conditions (ie psychosocial assessment; concurrent sleep and non-sleep conditions; drug and substance use or abuse; and additional factors). The work of the two groups that led to the identification of different domains for assessment is summarised in this manuscript, along with a road map for future researches. Such an approach will allow clinicians and researchers to modulate evaluation of bruxism patients with a comprehensive look at the clinical impact of the different bruxism activities and aetiologies. The ultimate goal of this multidimensional system is to facilitate the refinement of decision-making algorithms in the clinical setting.

Medical emergency department attendance of under 16-year-olds with dental problems.

BACKGROUND: Medical emergency departments (MED) are under increasing pressure in the UK with suggestions that unnecessary attendances to MED, which may include dental problems, are to blame. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to examine the period prevalence of under 16-year-olds attendance to medical emergency departments (MED) with oral and dental problems over a 5-year period and investigate reason for attendance. This cross-sectional study was carried out as part of a service evaluation at the Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2016 from the MED database using coding and a free text search of all paediatric attendances. The data were then analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Over the 5-year period, 135 760 under 16-year-olds attended the MED. Of these, 868 (0.6%) attended for dental problems. The most common dental reasons for attendance were as follows: Candida accounted for 22.6% of the 0- to 5-year-olds; dental trauma accounted for 29.5% of 6- to 11-year-olds; and mandibular fractures accounted for 18.9% of the 12- to 16-year-olds. Of those who attended the MED for dental problems, 28.5% resided in areas with an Index of Multiple Deprivation decile of 1, the areas of highest deprivation in the UK. CONCLUSION: Many of the diagnoses may have been appropriately managed elsewhere in the community, which may result in improved treatment provision and tailored care pathways, as well as reducing strain on the MED. Further research is needed to investigate why patients attend MED with dental problems.

Benefits of implementing pain-related disability and psychological assessment in dental practice for patients with temporomandibular pain and other oral health conditions.

BACKGROUND: Evidence in the field of dentistry has demonstrated the importance of pain-related disability and psychological assessment in the development of chronic symptoms. The Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders offer a brief assessment for the diagnostic process in patients with orofacial pain (Axis II). The authors describe relevant outcomes that may guide general oral health care practitioners toward tailored treatment decisions and improved treatment outcomes and provide recommendations for the primary care setting. METHODS: The authors conducted a review of the literature to provide an overview of knowledge about Axis II assessment relevant for the general oral health care practitioner. RESULTS: The authors propose 3 domains of the Axis II assessment to be used in general oral health care: pain location (pain drawing), pain intensity and related disability (Graded Chronic Pain Scale [GCPS]), and psychological distress (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]). In the case of localized pain, low GCPS scores (0-II), and low PHQ-4 scores (0-5), patients preferably receive treatment in primary care. In the case of widespread pain, high GCPS scores (III-IV), and high PHQ-4 scores (6-12), the authors recommend referral to a multidisciplinary team, especially for patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain. CONCLUSIONS: The authors recommend psychological assessment at first intake of a new adult patient or for patients with persistent TMD pain. The authors recommend the pain-related disability screening tools for all TMD pain symptoms and for dental pain symptoms that persist beyond the normal healing period. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: A brief psychological and pain-related disability assessment for patients in primary care may help the general oral health care practitioner make tailored treatment decisions.

Initial accuracy assessment of the modified S-LANSS for the detection of neuropathic orofacial pain conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of a questionnaire modified for the identification of intraoral pain with neuropathic characteristics in a clinical orofacial pain sample population. METHOD AND MATERIALS: 136 participants with at least one of four orofacial pain diagnoses (temporomandibular disorders [TMD, n = 41], acute dental pain [ADP, n = 41], trigeminal neuralgia [TN, n = 19], persistent dentoalveolar pain disorder [PDAP, n = 14]) and a group of pain-free controls (n = 21) completed the modified S-LANSS, a previously adapted version of the original questionnaire devised to detected patients suffering from intraoral pain with neuropathic characteristics. Psychometric properties (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], negative predictive value [NPV]) were calculated in two analyses with two different thresholds: (1) Detection of pain with neuropathic characteristics: PDAP + TN were considered positive, and TMD + ADP + controls were considered negative per gold standard (expert opinion). (2) Detection of PDAP: PDAP was considered positive and TMD + ADP were considered negative per gold standard. For both analyses, target values for adequate sensitivity and specificity were defined as ≥ 80%. RESULTS: For detection of orofacial pain with neuropathic characteristics (PDAP + TN), the modified S-LANSS presented with the most optimistic threshold sensitivity of 52% (95% confidence interval [CI], 34-69), specificity of 70% (95% CI, 60-79), PPV of 35% (95% CI, 22-51), and NPV of 82% (95% CI, 72-89). For detection of PDAP only, with the most optimistic threshold sensitivity was 64% (95% CI, 35-87), specificity 63% (95% CI, 52-74), PPV 23% (95% CI, 11-39) and NPV 91% (95% CI, 81-97). CONCLUSION: Based on a priori defined criteria, the modified S-LANSS did not show adequate accuracy to detect intraoral pain with neuropathic characteristics in a clinical orofacial pain sample.

Developing Effective and Efficient care pathways in chronic Pain: DEEP study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Pain affecting the face or mouth and lasting longer than three months ("chronic orofacial pain", COFP) is relatively common in the UK. This study aims to describe and model current care pathways for COFP patients, identify areas where current pathways could be modified, and model whether these changes would improve outcomes for patients and use resources more efficiently. METHODS/DESIGN: The study takes a prospective operations research approach. A cohort of primary and secondary care COFP patients (n = 240) will be recruited at differing stages of their care in order to follow and analyse their journey through care. The cohort will be followed for two years with data collected at baseline 6, 12, 18, and 24 months on: 1) experiences of the care pathway and its impacts; 2) quality of life; 3) pain; 4) use of health services and costs incurred; 5) illness perceptions. Qualitative in-depth interviews will be used to collect data on patient experiences from a purposive sub-sample of the total cohort (n = 30) at baseline, 12 and 24 months. Four separate appraisal groups (public, patient, clincian, service manager/commissioning) will then be given data from the pathway analysis and asked to determine their priority areas for change. The proposals from appraisal groups will inform an economic modelling exercise. Findings from the economic modelling will be presented as incremental costs, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs), and the incremental cost per QALY gained. At the end of the modelling a series of recommendations for service change will be available for implementation or further trial if necessary. DISCUSSION: The recent white paper on health and the report from the NHS Forum identified chronic conditions as priority areas and whilst technology can improve outcomes, so can simple, appropriate and well-defined clinical care pathways. Understanding the opportunity cost related to care pathways benefits the wider NHS. This research develops a method to help design efficient systems built around one condition (COFP), but the principles should be applicable to a wide range of other chronic and long-term conditions.

Patients' experiences of the impact of periodontal disease.

AIM: To examine critically patients' experiences of the impact of periodontal disease on their daily lives. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Semi-structured interviews of a purposive sample of patients with periodontal conditions were conducted using a flexible evolving topic guide. Data collection and analysis were an inductive, iterative process that occurred concurrently. The data were organized in a framework and recurrent themes identified. Interviews occurred until it was felt that no new themes or ideas were being expressed by respondents (n=14). RESULTS: Effects of periodontal disease on patients' daily lives included impairment, functional limitation, discomfort and disability (including physical, psychosocial and social disability). A large number of the emergent themes from the analysis were relevant to the domains of Locker's conceptual model of oral health. The domain within Locker's model that had no data relevant to it in the context of periodontal disease was death. Two additional themes emerged that appeared unrelated to Locker's model, these were stigma and retrospective regret. CONCLUSION: Periodontal disease reportedly affects patients' lives in a negative manner in a variety of ways. This is of relevance in the management of patients with periodontitis.

The relationship between formative and summative assessment of undergraduates in oral surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Regular, on-going formative assessments or a more comprehensive end of program summative assessment can be used to assess student's progress. The literature is scarce regarding the use of both types of assessment coincidentally and if the outcomes of formative assessments can predict the grades achieved summatively. This paper investigates whether there is any correlation between the formative assessments used in routine clinical contacts in the Newcastle course and the final summative assessment grade. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The logbooks of 72 third year dental students were examined to collect data on the gradings achieved for formative and summative assessments. The categories of history and presentation, local anaesthesia, extraction and overall grades for each were compared using Spearman's Rho. RESULTS: Six logbooks were incomplete so were omitted from analysis (n = 66). In the formative assessment, the total number of teeth extracted was 1913, giving a mean per student of 29 (SD = 6.88). In the summative assessment, 15 students failed on their first attempt but all subsequently passed on resit. DISCUSSION: Positive correlation was found within each of the two types of assessment but no correlation was found between the overall grades for the formative and summative assessment. The overall grade achieved by a student in the formative assessment does not appear to predict their grade in the summative. The use of both assessments is beneficial, however, their use together must be considered carefully to avoid confusing students.