Nonmalignant Oral Disease--Specific Dental Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Adult Patients: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) can be differentiated into outcome measures for all oral diseases, so-called disease-generic dPROMs, and measures for specific oral diseases, so-called disease-specific dPROMs. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the psychometrically validated nonmalignant disease-specific dPROMs for adult patients and the dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) they measure. METHODS: This systematic review searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane databases along with hand searching, through July 28, 2020, to identify original articles of English language, multi-item dPROMs for adult dental patients with a specific oral disease, condition, or oral manifestations of systemic diseases. We analyzed the questionnaires for content commonalities, the reference or recall period, and the dimensionality. RESULTS: We retrieved 4228 unique references and identified 34 questionnaires; of which, 31 questionnaires captured impacts from oral diseases or conditions and three from oral manifestations of systemic diseases. All questionnaires together contained 102 dPROMs, measuring 75 dPROs. Oral health-related quality of life was a broader dPRO, which was measured by 24 dPROMs. The 74 narrower dPROs were measured by 78 dPROMs. The dPRO names suggested that essentially four dPROs were measured: Oral Function (N = 19), Orofacial Pain (N = 7), Orofacial Appearance (N = 11), and Psychosocial Impact (N = 37). CONCLUSIONS: Many psychometrically validated tools (N = 102) are available to measure the impact of specific nonmalignant oral disease on patients. While these tools intend to measure the particular patient-perceived impact profile of the oral disease, all tools measure in essence only four, more general concepts - the dimensions of oral health-related quality of life.

Global assessment of national mandatory vaccination policies and consequences of non-compliance.

BACKGROUND: Declining vaccination coverage and increasing hesitancy is a worldwide concern. Many countries have implemented mandatory vaccination policies to promote vaccination. However, mandatory vaccination policies differ significantly by country. Beyond case studies, no comprehensive study has compared these policies or the penalties for non-compliance on a global scale. METHODS: We conducted extensive keyword, policy, and literature searches to identify mandatory national vaccination policies globally and develop a comprehensive database. A mandatory national vaccination policy was defined as a policy from a national authority that requires individuals to receive at least one vaccination based on age or to access a service. Two reviewers independently evaluated evidence for a mandate and whether non-compliance penalties were incorporated. We categorized penalties into four types, based on the nature of the penalty. These penalties impact an individual's financial, parental rights, educational (i.e., child's school entry and access), and liberty status. We rated the severity within each category. RESULTS: Of 193 countries investigated, 54% (n = 105) had evidence of a nationwide mandate as of December 2018. The frequency, types, and severity of penalties varied widely across all regions. We found that 59% (n = 62) of countries with national mandates defined at least one penalty for non-compliance with a vaccine mandate. Among those, educational penalties (i.e., limiting a child's entry or ongoing access to school) were the most common (69%; n = 43), with most countries with educational penalties refusing school enrollment until vaccination requirements are met (81%; n = 35). CONCLUSION: We undertook a comprehensive assessment of national mandatory vaccination policies and identified a diversity of penalties in place to promote compliance. Our results highlight the need to critically evaluate the implementation of non-compliance penalties in order to determine their effectiveness and to define best practices for sustaining high vaccination uptake worldwide.

Oral Health Literacy and Outcomes in Rural Wisconsin Adults.

PURPOSE: Low oral health literacy (OHL) is an emerging risk factor for several oral health outcomes, but there are very few studies of OHL overall and no studies of OHL in the rural United States. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between OHL and sociodemographic factors, as well as several oral health outcomes, in rural adults served by an integrated medical and dental care system in Wisconsin. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to a stratified random sample of patients from 2 rural communities. Survey data were linked to local electronic health records. Multivariable regression was used to identify sociodemographic determinants of low OHL, as well as associations between OHL and: oral hygiene, oral health quality of life, dentist visits, and emergency/urgent care visits for nontraumatic dental conditions. FINDINGS: Among the 164 respondents, OHL scores were generally high but were significantly lower among nonwhite participants (P < .001), as well as those without a college degree (P < .001) and those with an annual household income under $40,000 (P = .029). Lower OHL scores were significantly associated with lower quality of life scores (P = .005), fewer visits to the dentist (P = .007), and more emergency room visits for nontraumatic dental conditions (P = .021). CONCLUSION: In rural Wisconsin, low OHL tracked closely with markers of socioeconomic status and appeared most influential in the context of appropriate dental care utilization. Future research should consider longitudinal explorations of how OHL influences preventive and emergency dental visits over time.