Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of an innovative medical device for improving oral accessibility during oral examination in special-needs patients: A multicentric clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: People with special needs have high unmet oral healthcare needs, partly because dentists find it difficult to access their oral cavity. The Oral Accessibility Spatula aims to improve oral accessibility. This prospective multicenter interventional open-label non-randomized patient-self-controlled trial assessed the ability of the spatula to improve the oral accessibility of special-needs patients during dental examinations. METHODS: The cohort was a convenience sample of minor and adult patients with special needs due to physical, intellectual, and/or behavioral disorders who underwent dental check-up/treatment in five French tertiary hospitals/private clinics in 2016-2018 and evinced some (Venham-Score = 2-4) but not complete (Venham-Score = 5) resistance to oral examination. After inclusion, patients underwent oral examination without the spatula and then immediately thereafter oral examination with the spatula. Primary outcome was Oral Accessibility Score (0-12 points; higher scores indicate visualization and probing of the tooth sectors). Secondary outcomes were patient toleration (change in Venham-Score relative to first examination), safety, and Examiner Satisfaction Score (0-10; low scores indicate unsatisfactory examination). RESULTS: The 201 patients were mostly non-elderly adults (18-64 years, 65%) but also included children (21%), adolescents (11%), and aged patients (3%). One-quarter, half, and one-quarter had Venham-Score = 2, 3, and 4 at inclusion, respectively. The spatula significantly improved Oral Accessibility Score (4.8 to 10.8), Venham-Score (3.1 to 2.6), and Examiner Satisfaction Score (3.4 to 7.2) (all p<0.001). There were no severe spatula-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: The spatula significantly improved oral access, was safe and well-tolerated by the patients, and markedly improved oral examination quality.

Paracetamol Misuse and Dental Pain: Results from the French Observational DAntaLor Study.

AIMS: To evaluate the risk of hepatotoxicity due to unintentional paracetamol misuse in patients with acute dental pain. METHODS: A prospective multicenter observational survey was performed in patients consulting, without appointment, the odontology departments of three main French hospitals in the Lorraine region over a 3-month period. Patients were asked to fill out a medical questionnaire while seated in the waiting room. Those who completed the questionnaire, had dental pain, and took paracetamol were included in the DAntaLor study. Misuse was defined as a daily dose of more than 4 g of paracetamol per day. The risk of hepatotoxicity was considered high if the supposed ingested dose was above the threshold of 150 mg.kg-1.24h-1, 125 mg.kg-1.24h-1, or 100 mg.kg1.24h-1 over periods of 24, 48, and 72 hours, respectively. Hepatotoxicity was suspected in the presence of clinical symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 1,810 patients consulting the odontology departments, 741 were included in the study. Painkillers were used in 74.4% of the cases, and paracetamol was taken by 81.7%. Paracetamol was self-medicated in 85.5% of the patients and misused by 6.0%. Clinical symptoms were observed in 1.6% of the patients with no paracetamol misuse. For patients consuming more than 4 g per day and experiencing mild unspecific clinical symptoms of hepatotoxicity, the suspected ingested dose category was below one of the three previously defined thresholds for 11.8% and was above for 40.0%. CONCLUSION: Patients with dental pain are at risk of paracetamol overdose and hepatotoxicity.