Long-term effectiveness of the midwifery initiated oral health-dental service program on maternal oral health knowledge, preventative dental behaviours and the oral health status of children in Australia.

BACKGROUND: The Midwifery Initiated Oral Health-Dental Service was developed to train midwives to promote maternal oral health, and a large trial showed it substantially improved the oral health, knowledge and behaviours of pregnant women. AIM: Evaluate the long-term effectiveness of the program (post-trial) on maternal oral health knowledge, dental behaviours, and early childhood caries in offspring. METHODS: A prospective cohort study involving 204 women and children 3-4 years (followed after trial) was conducted in Sydney, Australia from 2017 to 2019. RESULTS: The program did not have a significant impact on the study measures. Mothers who received the program did have comparatively better knowledge around preventative behaviours to reduce early childhood caries and significantly more mothers were engaging in a key behaviour of using a cup to feed their child. Overall maternal oral health knowledge and level of education did have a protective effect on the dental decay of children. Higher knowledge and levels of education reduced the odds of having a dmft of one or more by over half (OR 0.473), and almost 80% (OR 0.212) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the MIOH-DS program was not effective, there is still value in exploring other complementary interventions to improve maternal oral health, especially for disadvantaged families. Future research should focus on co-designing an antenatal and postnatal oral health intervention and exploring its long-term impact on the oral health of children.

Effectiveness of preventive dental programs offered to mothers by non-dental professionals to control early childhood dental caries: a review.

BACKGROUND: Early childhood caries is a common chronic childhood disease and maternal oral health is a risk factor. Improving the oral health behaviours of pregnant women/young mothers can positively influence the oral health of children and reduce their caries risk. Such preventative strategies have been undertaken by non-dental professionals producing mixed results encompassing various interventions across the perinatal period. However, no comprehensive review of these studies has been undertaken. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of maternal oral health programs undertaken during the antenatal and/or postnatal period by non-dental health professionals to reduce early childhood caries. METHODS: A systematic search of five databases was undertaken using key search terms. Studies were included if they (a) involved quantitative study designs with a control; (b) were published in English; (c) reported on interventions delivered by non-dental professionals (d) delivered the intervention to expectant mothers or mothers with young infants up to 24 months; (e) measured outcomes when the child was under 5 years; (f) measured changes in oral health outcomes of children clinically and oral health behaviours of mothers or children. No restrictions were placed on the study quality and setting. RESULTS: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and involved interventions delivered by diverse non-dental professionals across the antenatal (n = 1), postnatal (n = 6) and perinatal period (n = 2). Most studies were of low methodological quality (n = 6). The interventions focussed on oral health education (n = 8), dental referrals (n = 3) and oral health assessments (n = 1). Interventions conducted in either the postnatal or antenatal periods showed meaningful improvements in children's clinical and mother's behavioural oral health outcomes. The outcomes appear to be sustained when a suite of interventions were used along with referral reminders. There were mixed results from interventions across the perinatal period. CONCLUSIONS: Non-dental professionals can promote maternal oral health by providing oral health education, risk assessment and referrals. Combining these interventions could provide a sustained improvement in oral health outcomes for children although current evidence is weak. More high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and determine whether the antenatal and/or postnatal period is best suited to deliver these interventions.

Process evaluation of the midwifery initiated oral health-dental service program: Perceptions of dental professionals.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: All pregnant women should have a comprehensive oral health evaluation. Unfortunately, many pregnant women seldom seek dental care and some dentists are hesitant to treat during pregnancy. To address these issues, the Midwifery Initiated Oral Health Dental Service (MIOH-DS) program was developed in Australia. The aim of this study was to undertake a process evaluation and explore the perceptions of dental professionals involved in the program to determine the acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness of the program if it were to be upscaled. METHODS: A qualitative approach using content analysis was conducted on data from two focus groups involving 12 dental professionals. RESULTS: All participants were supportive of the MIOH-DS program. They thought pregnant women were receptive to their care, and reported markedly improved oral health. The provision of free dental care and the involvement of midwives were cited as major factors that improved the uptake of the program. Some of the challenges encountered were the prevailing misconceptions about the safety of dental treatment and pregnancy-related impairments. CONCLUSIONS: Dental professionals found the MIOH-DS to be acceptable, feasible and effective in improving oral health of pregnant women and their uptake of dental services. However, some challenges need to be addressed as the MIOH-DS program is upscaled into a cost-effective model. SO WHAT?: Dental professionals are important stakeholders in the MIOH-DS model. The process evaluation of the successful dental intervention is necessary to understand how and why such interventions work, and is an important step in scaling up to a population-wide intervention.

What do antenatal care providers understand and do about oral health care during pregnancy: a cross-sectional survey in New South Wales, Australia.

BACKGROUND: There is mounting evidence to support the lack of awareness among pregnant women about health consequences and long term risks associated with poor oral hygiene during pregnancy. A recognised and important point of influence is their interaction with health professionals, particularly when receiving Antenatal Care. However, there is limited evidence about the perceptions of ANC providers in Australia toward the provision of perinatal oral healthcare. This study was undertaken to explore the knowledge, attitudes and practices of Antenatal Care (ANC) providers in New South Wales (NSW), Australia providing perinatal oral healthcare and to identify barriers to and predictors of their practices in this area. METHODS: A cross sectional survey was undertaken of ANC providers (general practitioners, obstetricians/gynaecologists and midwives) practising in NSW, Australia. Participants were recruited through their professional organisations via email, postal mail, and networking at conferences. The survey addressed the domains of knowledge, attitude, barriers and practices towards oral healthcare, along with demographics. Data was entered into SPSS software and analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS: A total of 393 surveys (17.6% response rate) were completed comprising 124 general practitioners, 74 obstetricians/gynaecologists and 195 midwives. The results showed limited knowledge among ANC providers regarding the impact of poor maternal oral health on pregnancy/infant outcomes. Most (99%) participants agreed that maternal oral health was important yet few were discussing the importance of oral health or advising women to visit a dentist (16.4-21.5%). Further, less than a third felt they had the skills to provide oral health advice during pregnancy. ANC providers who were more knowledgeable about maternal oral health, had training and information in this area and greater experience, were more likely to engage in practices addressing the oral health of pregnant women. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that ANC providers in NSW are not focussing on oral health with pregnant women. ANC providers seem willing to discuss oral health if they have appropriate education/training and information in this area. Further research at a national level is required to confirm whether these findings are similar in all Australian states.

Measuring oral health during pregnancy: sensitivity and specificity of a maternal oral screening (MOS) tool.

BACKGROUND: Midwives can play a key role in promoting the oral health of pregnant women and assessing their oral health status. A maternal oral assessment tool (MOS) was developed and pilot tested by the study investigators to assist midwives in this role and the results were promising. The aim of this study was to undertake further sensitivity and specificity assessment of the MOS tool using two-comparison approaches- the longer oral health screening tool known as the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and an oral assessment by trained study dentists. METHODS: Pregnant women were recruited for this study as part of a larger randomised controlled trial of a Midwifery Initiated Oral Health (MIOH) program. Pregnant women completed the MOS and OHIP-14 as part of their initial assessment undertaken by 38 trained and accredited midwives. A dental assessment was conducted for all women in the intervention group using three trained study dentists with high inter rater reliability. RESULTS: Two hundred and eleven pregnant women participated in the validation of the MOS tool. Results from both approaches found the MOS tool to have high sensitivity, correctly identifying 88-94 % of women at risk of poor dental health, and low specificity (14-21 %). CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that the MOS tool can be successfully implemented by midwives during a woman's first antenatal visit and can identify up to 94 % of women at risk of poor oral health and needing a dental referral. The tool has the potential to be transferable to other antenatal care providers and could be incorporated into hospital obstetric database systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12612001271897 , 6th Dec 2012, retrospectively registered.

The early childhood oral health program: a qualitative study of the perceptions of child and family health nurses in South Western Sydney, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Early childhood caries affects nearly half the population of Australian children aged 5 years and has the potential to negatively impact their growth and development. To address this issue, an Early Childhood Oral Health (ECOH) program, facilitated by Child and Family Health Nurses (CFHNs), commenced in 2007 in New South Wales, Australia. This study builds on the previous evaluation of the program. It aims to explore the perceptions of CFHNs regarding the implementation of the ECOH program in South Western Sydney and the challenges and barriers related to its sustainability. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative design was used in this study. Two focus groups were conducted with 22 CFHNs who were sampled from two Community Health Centres in South Western Sydney, Australia. Data were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Most CFHNs acknowledged the importance of early childhood oral health promotion and were providing education, oral assessments and referrals during child health checks. Many stressed the need for collaboration with other health professionals to help broaden the scope of the program. Some barriers to implementing the program included confusion regarding the correct referral process, limited feedback from dental services and the lack of oral health awareness among parents. CONCLUSION: The study findings suggest that the ECOH program is being sustained and effectively implemented into practice by CFHNs. Improvement in the referral and feedback process as well as enhancing parental knowledge of the importance of infant and child oral health could further strengthen the effectiveness of the program. Expanding oral health education opportunities into general practice is advocated, while regular on-line training for CFHNs is preferred. Future research should include strategies to reduce non-attendances, and an assessment of the impact on the prevalence of childhood caries of the ECOH program.

Developing and Testing of an Oral Health Screening Tool for Midwives to Assess Pregnant Woman.

Maternal oral health is important, and midwives are encouraged to screen women for dental problems. We aimed to develop and test a midwifery oral health screening tool. A three-item tool was tested as part of a trial involving 300 women in Southwestern Sydney. A two-item combination showed better sensitivity (98%) and had a positive predictive value of 88%. Specificity was 40%, and negative predictive value was 80%. A two-item screening tool has been identified that is sensitive to identifying dental problems and facilitating referrals. Further validation using a larger sample is required to reassess the tool's specificity.

The midwifery initiated oral health-dental service protocol: an intervention to improve oral health outcomes for pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is emerging that women's poor oral health and health practices during pregnancy are associated with poor oral health in their children and potentially an increased risk of pre-term or low-birth weight infants. METHODS/DESIGN: The Midwifery Initiated Oral Health-Dental Service (MIOH-DS) trial is a three arm multicentre randomised controlled trial which will recruit women from three metropolitan hospitals aimed at improving women's oral health and service access and indirectly reducing perinatal morbidity. All three arms of the trial will deliver oral health promotion material, although a midwife oral assessment and referral to private/public/health fund dental services pathway (Intervention Group 1) and the midwife oral assessment and referral to local free public dental services pathway (Intervention Group 2) will be compared to the control group of oral health promotional material only. Midwives will undergo specific oral health education and competency testing to undertake this novel intervention. DISCUSSION: This efficacy trial will promote a new partnership between midwives and dentists focused on enhancing the oral health of women and their infants. Should the intervention be found effective, this intervention, with existing on-line educational program for midwives, can be easily transferred into practice for large metropolitan health services within and beyond Australia. Further cost-benefit analysis is proposed to inform national health policy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612001271897.

Views of pregnant women in South Western Sydney towards dental care and an oral-health program initiated by midwives.

ISSUES ADDRESSED: Oral health during pregnancy is important, yet is often neglected by women. A program is currently being developed for midwives in Australia to promote maternal oral health. The aim of this study was to record the views of pregnant women in Australia towards dental care and midwives promoting oral health. METHODS: Using convenience sampling, a cross-sectional survey was undertaken of 241 pregnant women attending a metropolitan hospital in South Western Sydney in 2010. RESULTS: Only 10% of women received oral-health promotional material during pregnancy. More than 50% reported dental problems, yet only 17% had discussed this with their midwives and less than half (44.6%) had sought dental treatment. The main barriers to obtaining dental care were: lack of awareness, safety concerns about dental treatment and dental costs. Pregnant women were more likely (P<0.05) to see a dentist if they had received information about oral health (odds ratio (OR) 3.25, 95% CI 1.34-7.90) and had private health insurance (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.26-4.85). Most women (>90%) were receptive to midwives providing oral-health education, assessments and referrals to affordable dental services. CONCLUSION: This study has shown that pregnant women are receiving limited dental advice and are concerned about dental costs. It has also confirmed for the first time in Australia that women are very positive about receiving oral-health advice from midwives during their pregnancy. SO WHAT?: Oral-health promotion programs during pregnancy should consider using midwives to increase dental awareness among women and provide pathways to affordable dental services.

How do dental and prenatal care practitioners perceive dental care during pregnancy? Current evidence and implications.

BACKGROUND: Poor maternal oral health may be associated with adverse pregnancy and infant outcomes. However, women seldom seek dental care during pregnancy, and misconceptions by prenatal care practitioners about oral health care during pregnancy may contribute to the problem. The aim of this study was to review current knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of dental and prenatal care practitioners about oral health care during pregnancy. METHODS: This review examined all studies published in English that explored the knowledge, attitude, behavior, and barriers faced by dentists, general practitioners, midwives, and obstetricians/gynecologists with respect to oral health care during pregnancy. RESULTS: Despite acknowledging the importance of maternal oral health, many dentists are uncertain about the safety of dental procedures and are hesitant in treating pregnant women. General practitioners and midwives are poorly informed about the impact of poor maternal oral health and rarely initiate this topic during prenatal care. Many general practitioners also believe that dental procedures are unsafe during pregnancy. Obstetricians/gynecologists are well informed about perinatal oral health and are supportive of dental procedures, but because of lack of training in this area and competing health demands they seldom focus on oral health care during their prenatal care. CONCLUSION: No real consensus exists among dentists and prenatal care practitioners with respect to oral health care during pregnancy. This issue poses a significant deterrent for pregnant women seeking dental care. Practice guidelines in perinatal oral health are needed for health professionals to emphasize this important aspect of prenatal care.

Midwives and oral health care during pregnancy: perceptions of pregnant women in south-western Sydney, Australia.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: This study sought to explore the perceptions of pregnant women in Australia towards oral health care during pregnancy and their views regarding midwives providing oral health education, assessment and referrals as part of antenatal care. BACKGROUND: Maintaining oral health during pregnancy is important. Yet, many pregnant women do not access dental services during this time. Antenatal care providers are now recommended to promote maternal oral health, and various countries have adopted this strategy. However, in Australia, a lack of emphasis is placed on maternal oral health especially by antenatal care providers. Currently, a preventive programme is being developed to promote maternal oral health with the help of midwives in Australia. Very little is known about the perceptions of such an approach from pregnant women. DESIGN: Qualitative approach. METHOD: Data were collected via semi-structured telephone interviews with 10 pregnant women residing in south-western Sydney. RESULTS: Thematic analyses of the data suggest a high prevalence of poor oral health among pregnant women, especially those socioeconomically disadvantaged. The findings also highlight various barriers deterring these women from seeking dental care the most significant being lack of dental awareness, high treatment costs and misconceptions about dental treatment during pregnancy. The absence of affordable dental care remains a major barrier in Australia. The proposed preventive programme was well received by women although issues such as education for midwives and referral pathways were highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that a tailored midwifery-initiated oral health programme has potential in Australia, especially for low-income families as it addresses many existing barriers to dental care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Antenatal care providers in Australia should provide more information about oral health. These health professionals should be adequately educated to promote oral health. Health services should also consider offering pregnant women affordable and accessible dental services.

Maintaining oral health during pregnancy: perceptions of midwives in Southwest Sydney.

Current evidence highlights the importance of maintaining good oral health during pregnancy, unfortunately, many women in Australia do not access dental services at this time. Compounding the situation is the lack of importance placed on the value of good maternal oral health by prenatal care providers. These constraints highlight the potential value of having preventive oral health advice and referral to an appropriate care pathway during the prenatal period. Midwives are in an excellent position to offer such a service, although the specific aspects of the role have not been clearly defined in Australia. As a preliminary step to the development of an oral health service program, initiated by midwives, this study assesses the midwives' perceptions of such an approach. Data were collected for this qualitative study via a focus group with 15 midwives. Thematic analyses of the data showed that despite the high prevalence of poor oral health in the area, most midwives were unaware of its possible ill-effects on maternal and child health. Midwives were also reluctant to discuss oral health with pregnant women because of a lack of appropriate referral pathways to the Public Dental Services. Midwives were receptive to the idea of establishing this new service but highlighted barriers such as the time involved, the competencies required and the need for referral pathways. The findings suggest that a midwifery-initiated oral health service has potential although issues such as training, time constraints and referral pathways must be addressed.

Economic evaluation of the Midwifery Initiated Oral Health-Dental Service programme in Australia.

OBJECTIVES: To critically evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Midwifery Initiated Oral Health-Dental Service (MIOH-DS) designed to improve oral health of pregnant Australian women. Previous efficacy and process evaluations of MIOH-DS showed positive outcomes and improvements across various measures. DESIGN AND SETTING: The evaluation used a cost-utility model based on the initial study design of the MIOH-DS trial in Sydney, Australia from the perspective of public healthcare provider for a duration of 3 months to 4 years. PARTICIPANTS: Data were sourced from pregnant women (n=638), midwives (n=17) and dentists (n=3) involved in the MIOH trial and long-term follow-up. COST MEASURES: Data included in analysis were the cost of the time required by midwives and dentists to deliver the intervention and the cost of dental treatment provided. Costs were measured using data on utilisation and unit price of intervention components and obtained from a micro-costing approach. OUTCOME MEASURES: Utility was measured as the number of Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) from health-benefit components of the intervention. Three cost-effectiveness analyses were undertaken using different comparators, thresholds and time scenarios. RESULTS: Compared with current practice, midwives only intervention meets the Australian threshold (A$50 000) of being cost-effective. The midwives and accessible/affordable dentists joint intervention was only 'cost-effective' in 6 months or beyond scenarios. When the midwife only intervention is the comparator, the midwife/dentist programme was 'cost-effective' in all scenarios except at 3 months scenario. CONCLUSIONS: The midwives' only intervention providing oral health education, assessment and referral to existing dental services was cost-effective, and represents a low cost intervention. Midwives' and dentists' combined interventions were cost-effective when the benefits were considered over longer periods. The findings highlight short and long term economic benefits of the programme and support the need for policymakers to consider adding an oral health component into antenatal care Australia wide. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12612001271897; Post-results.

Promoting oral health during pregnancy: current evidence and implications for Australian midwives.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to examine current evidence supporting the promotion of oral health during pregnancy and proffer aspects of a potential role for Australian midwives. BACKGROUND: Research continues to show that poor oral health during pregnancy can have an impact on the health outcomes of the mother and baby. Poor maternal oral health increases the chances of infants developing early caries and is strongly associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes such as preterm and low birth-weight babies. Unfortunately in Australia, no preventive strategies exist to maintain the oral health of pregnant women. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHOD: This review examines all literature on oral health during pregnancy published to date in the English language and focuses on whether preventive oral health strategies during the prenatal period are warranted in Australia and if so, how they could be provided. RESULTS: Maintaining oral health is important during pregnancy and many developed countries have implemented preventive strategies to address this issue using non-dental professionals such as prenatal care providers. However, despite the positive international evidence, limited importance is being given to the oral health of pregnant women in Australia. It is also evident that the unique potential of prenatal care providers such as midwives to assess and improve maternal oral heath is not being thoroughly utilised. Compounding the issue in Australia, especially for pregnant women from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, is the limited access to public dental services and the high cost of private dental treatment. CONCLUSION: Promoting and maintaining oral health during pregnancy is crucial, and preventive prenatal oral health services are needed in Australia to achieve this. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Midwives have an excellent opportunity to offer preventive oral health services by providing oral health assessments, education and referrals for pregnant women attending antenatal clinics.

Process evaluation of the midwifery initiated oral health-dental service program: Perceptions of midwives in Greater Western Sydney, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Despite links between poor maternal oral health, adverse pregnancy outcomes and early childhood decay there is limited emphasis on maternal oral health in Australia. To address this, the Midwifery Initiated Oral Health Dental Service (MIOH-DS) program was developed in collaboration with the Australian College of Midwives. AIMS: To undertake a process evaluation and explore perceptions of midwives involved in the MIOH-DS program to determine its practicability, acceptability and feasibility if it were to be up-scaled and implemented into clinical practice. METHODS: Qualitative content analysis was undertaken on data from three focus groups with 21 midwives. FINDINGS: Midwives generally found the MIOH-DS to be acceptable and feasible with potential for widespread scalability. The trust women had in midwives was an important factor in gaining women's attention about oral health in pregnancy. The program assisted in increasing midwives' knowledge and awareness, though some felt it was outside their scope of practice. The oral health assessment tool was acceptable to midwives but some concerns were expressed about undertaking a visual oral inspection. Most midwives stated they were now confident with referring individuals to a dentist. Significant barriers to widespread implementation included the cost of dental care and the continued lack of awareness and misconceptions pregnant women had towards oral health. CONCLUSION: Midwives found the MIOH-DS to be acceptable and feasible which are two important barriers to potential implementation at scale. Misconceptions over the importance of oral health by women and cost of accessing dental services still need resolving.

Evaluation of a midwifery initiated oral health-dental service program to improve oral health and birth outcomes for pregnant women: A multi-centre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral health care during pregnancy is important for the health of the mother and child. However, pregnant women have limited knowledge about maternal oral health and seldom seek dental care. Further, due to limited training antenatal care providers like midwives rarely discuss oral health with pregnant women. The Midwifery-Initiated Oral Health Dental Service program was developed to address current gaps in oral promotional interventions during pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of a Midwifery-Initiated Oral Health Dental Service program in improving uptake of dental services, oral health knowledge, quality of oral health, oral health status and birth outcomes of pregnant women. DESIGN: Multi-centre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Three large metropolitan public hospitals in Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women attending their first antenatal appointment who were at least 18 years old and had a single low risk pregnancy between 12 and 20 weeks gestation. METHODS: 638 pregnant women were allocated to three groups using block randomisation (n = 211) control group, intervention group 1 (n = 215), intervention group 2 (n = 212) and followed up till birth. Study investigators and data collectors were blinded to group allocation. Intervention group 1 received a midwifery intervention from trained midwives involving oral health education, screening and referrals to existing dental pathways. Intervention group 2 received the midwifery intervention and a dental intervention involving assessment/treatment from cost free local dental services. The control group received oral health information at recruitment. Primary outcome was uptake of dental services. Secondary outcomes included oral health knowledge, quality of oral health, oral health status and birth outcomes. RESULTS: Substantial improvements in the use of dental services (20.2% Control Group; 28.3% Intervention group 1; 87.2% Intervention group 2; Odds Ratio Intervention group 2 vs Control Group = 29.72, 95% CI 15.02-58.53, p < 0.001), women's oral health knowledge (p = 0.03); quality of oral health (p < 0.001) and oral health outcomes (sulcus bleeding, dental plaque, clinical attachment loss, decayed/filled teeth- p < 0.001) were found in Intervention group 2. No difference in the rate of preterm or low-birth weight was found. CONCLUSIONS: The Midwifery-Initiated Oral Health Dental Service program (Intervention group 2) improved the uptake of dental services and oral health of pregnant women and is recommended during antenatal care. A cause and effect relationship between this intervention and improved birth outcomes was not supported.

The evaluation of an oral health education program for midwives in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal care providers are now recommended to promote oral health during pregnancy and provide dental referrals. However, midwives in Australia are not trained to undertake this role. To address this shortcoming, an online evidence based midwifery initiated oral health (MIOH) education program was systematically developed as a professional development activity. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the program in improving the oral health knowledge of midwives and assess their confidence to promote maternal oral health post training. METHODS: The program was evaluated using a pre-post test design involving 50 midwives purposively recruited from two states in Australia. The pre-post questionnaire contained 24 knowledge items previously pilot tested as well as items exploring confidence in promoting oral health and perceptions of the program. FINDINGS: The results showed a significant improvement in the oral health knowledge (↑21.5%, p<0.001) of midwives after completion of the program. The greatest improvement in knowledge occurred in key areas vital in promoting maternal oral health namely the high prevalence of dental problems and its impact on birth and infant outcomes. The majority also reported being confident in introducing oral health into antenatal care (82%) and referring women to dental services (77.6%) after undertaking the education program. CONCLUSION: The MIOH education program is a useful resource to equip midwives with the necessary knowledge and skills to promote oral health during pregnancy. The program is accessible and acceptable to midwives and can potentially be transferable to other antenatal care providers.

Development of an online education program for midwives in australia to improve perinatal oral health.

It is recommended that all pregnant women should receive a comprehensive oral health evaluation because poor maternal oral health may affect pregnancy outcomes and the general health of the woman and her baby. Midwives are well placed to provide dental health advice and referral. However, in Australia, little emphasis has been placed on the educational needs of midwives to undertake this role. This article outlines the development of an online education program designed to improve midwives' dental health knowledge, prepare them to assess the oral health of women, refer when required, and provide appropriate dental education to women and their families. The program consists of reading and visual material to assist with the oral health assessment process and includes competency testing.

Periodontal treatment during pregnancy and birth outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomised trials.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to conduct a meta-analysis of all up-to-date randomised control trials to determine whether periodontal treatment during pregnancy has the potential of reducing preterm birth and low birth weight incidence. METHODS: Bibliographic databases MEDLINE (1966-present), EMBASE (1980-present), CINAHL (1982-present) and the Cochrane library up to and including 2010 Issue 10 were searched. The reference list of included studies and reviews were also searched for additional literature. Eligible studies were, published and ongoing randomised control trials that compared pregnancy outcomes for pregnant women who received periodontal treatment during the prenatal period. Two of the investigators independently assessed the studies and then extracted and summarised data from eligible trials. Extracted data were entered into Review Manager software and analysed. RESULTS: A total of 5645 pregnant women participated in the 10 eligible trials. Meta-analysis found that periodontal treatment significantly lowered preterm birth (odd ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.93; P = 0.02) and low birth weight (odd ratio 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.92; P = 0.02) rates while no significant difference was found for spontaneous abortion/stillbirth (odd ratio 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-1.16; P = 0.17). Moderate heterogeneity was observed among the studies for preterm birth and low birth weight. Subgroup analysis showed significant effect of periodontal treatment in pregnant women with low rate of previous preterm birth/low birth weight (odd ratio 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 017-0.70; P = 0.003) and less severe periodontal disease (odd ratio 0.49; confidence interval, 028-0.87; P = 0.01) as defined by probing depth. CONCLUSION: The cumulative evidence suggests that periodontal treatment during pregnancy may reduce preterm birth and low birth weight incidence. However, these findings need to be further validated through larger more targeted randomised control trials.