Nondental orofacial pain in dental practices - diagnosis, therapy and self-assessment of German dentists and dental students.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-dental orofacial pain syndromes will often primarily consult general dentists and other dental specialists. Early and correct diagnosis and therapy is crucial to prevent chronification. METHODS: We assessed the experience of dentists (general dentists and dental specialists; n = 533) and knowledge level of dental students (n = 130) on the diagnosis and treatment of non-dental orofacial pain. We used an anonymized survey containing 14 items with the four main themes (1) prescription patterns, (2) treatment strategies in non-dental orofacial pain, (3) interdisciplinary cooperation, and (4) self-assessment of knowledge as well as post-graduate education. RESULTS: Ninety-two percent of dental students stated that they feel either 'not at all' (56%) or only 'somewhat' (36%) prepared for the diagnosis or treatment of non-dental orofacial pain. Only 23% of the dentists reported 'good' or 'very good' confidence for the diagnosis of non-dental orofacial pain. NSAID were the analgesics of choice when the pain is unspecific (25%) or even neuralgic (10%). Dentists referred patients with non-dental orofacial pain mostly to ENT-physicians (59%), oral and maxillofacial surgeons (54%) or TMD specialists (51%). CONCLUSION: Interdisciplinary pain treatment seems to be well acknowledged, however, with a focus on referral within the community of dental specialists. Dental curricula and post-graduate trainings need to implement the diagnosis and treatment options of non-dental orofacial pain.

A preliminary study applying decision analysis to the treatment of caries in primary teeth.

OBJECTIVE: To determine an optimal treatment strategy for carious deciduous teeth. SETTING: Manchester Dental Hospital. DESIGN: Decision analysis. METHOD: The likelihoods of each of the sequelae of caries in deciduous teeth were determined from the literature. The utility of the outcomes from non-treatment and treatment was then measured in 100 parents of children with caries, using a visual analogue scale. Decision analysis was performed which weighted the value of each potential outcome by the probability of its occurrence. A decision tree "fold-back" and sensitivity analysis then determined which treatment strategies, under which circumstances, offered the maximum expected utilities. RESULTS: The decision to leave a carious deciduous tooth unrestored attracted a maximum utility of 76.65 and the overall expected utility for the decision "restore" was 73.27 The decision to restore or not restore carious deciduous teeth are therefore of almost equal value. The decision is however highly sensitive to the utility value assigned to the advent of pain by the patient. CONCLUSIONS: There is no clear advantage to be gained by restoring deciduous teeth if patients' evaluations of outcomes are taken into account. Avoidance of pain and avoidance of procedures which are viewed as unpleasant by parents should be key determinants of clinical decision making about carious deciduous teeth.

Degree of dental anxiety in children with and without toothache: prospective assessment.

BACKGROUND: Few prospective studies on the anxiety of children in the dental office have been published. AIMS: To monitor dental anxiety levels in children with and without previous experience with toothache over a period of six consecutive visits. DESIGN: A longitudinal study was carried out involving 167 children treated at a public dental service. Levels of anxiety in the dental setting were assessed in children without toothache (G1) and those with toothache (G2) using the modified Venham picture test (VPT). Data acquisition was carried out over a 6-week period, with each child treated in the dental office once a week. Six assessments of anxiety were performed in the waiting room prior to dental treatment. RESULTS: A significant reduction in anxiety scores occurred between appointments in both groups. In the inter-group comparison, G2 had significantly higher anxiety scores than G1. Although statistically significant reductions in anxiety scores occurred through to the fifth appointment, a tendency toward stagnation in anxiety scores was observed beginning with the fourth appointment. CONCLUSIONS: Dental anxiety scores were reduced over the course of six appointments. Children with toothache had higher levels of dental anxiety than those that had never experienced toothache.

Puerto Rican athletes with special health care needs: an evaluation of oral health status.

PURPOSE: Limited data are available regarding the oral health of individuals with disabilities who reside in Puerto Rico. The Special Olympics Special Smiles oral health screening, education, and referral program provides an opportunity to explore the dental status and needs of Special Olympics athletes with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the oral health status of Special Olympics athletes participating in an event in Villalba, Puerto Rico in 2004. METHODS: A total of 161 self-selected athletes with intellectual disabilities were screened by 4 trained and calibrated dentists utilizing the criteria standards of the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, Special Olympics Special Smiles, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed for decayed, filled, and missing teeth. Oral hygiene, reports of oral pain, and sociodemographic information were recorded. The statistical test used was the chi-square test to establish associations and logistic regressions. Data were analyzed using EPI-INFO and SPSS programs. RESULTS: Almost 45% of examined athletes (mean age=19 years) had untreated dental decay; 33% had missing teeth, 60% had gingival signs of periodontal disease, and 16% reported dental pain. CONCLUSION: Results of clinical examinations indicate a population with intellectual disabilities that is in significant need of preventive and restorative oral health needs.

Orofacial Pain--Part II: Assessment and management of vascular, neurovascular, idiopathic, secondary, and psychogenic causes.

Chronic orofacial pain is a common health complaint faced by health practitioners today and constitutes a challenging diagnostic problem that often requires a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis and treatment. The previous article by the same authors in this issue discussed the major clinical characteristics and the treatment of various musculoskeletal and neuropathic orofacial pain conditions. This second article presents aspects of vascular, neurovascular, and idiopathic orofacial pain, as well as orofacial pain due to various local, distant, or systemic diseases and psychogenic orofacial pain. The emphasis in this article is on the general differential diagnosis and various therapeutic regimens of each of these conditions. An accurate diagnosis is the key to successful treatment of chronic orofacial pain. Given that for many of the entities discussed in this article no curative treatment is available, current standards of management are emphasized. A comprehensive reference section has been included for those who wish to gain further information on a particular entity.

Long-lasting orofacial pain--a study of 109 consecutive patients referred to a pain group.

The aim was to register and evaluate the orofacial pain condition, with special focus on the equalities/inequalities between the sexes, in consecutive patients referred to the pain group at the Centre for Oral Health Sciences in Malmö, Sweden. The 109 patients, 85 (78%) women and 24 (22%) men, were referred to the pain group during the years 1988 to 1993 and were clinically examined using a standardised procedure. Pain duration of one year or more was experienced by 83% of the patients. The pain onset was related to dental care or toothache by 56% of the patients. Temporomandibular disorders were the most common diagnoses (52%) and were more common among women than among men (p < 0.05). Multiple pain locations were frequently reported, range 1-47 locations, and the women had significantly (p < 0.05) more pain locations than the men. Equalities between the sexes were more frequent than inequalities among patients referred for long-lasting orofacial pain. It can be discussed whether the sex difference in the prevalence of pain of musculoskeletal origin emerges from biological differences or can be explained by different psychosocial circumstances.