The use of oral benzodiazepines for the management of dental anxiety: a web-based survey of UK dentists.

Background Oral benzodiazepines (OBZs) can facilitate treatment of dentally anxious patients and are widely used in countries such as Australia and the United States. Dentists in the UK prescribe them much less often.Aims To examine OBZ prescribing by dentists in the UK, including patterns of practice, barriers to use, and alternative anxiety management strategies.Methods An online mixed-methods survey was conducted utilising Qualtrics. Participants were recruited via the private Facebook group 'For Dentists, By Dentists' during April to June 2021. Quantitative data were analysed with descriptive statistics and qualitative data with thematic analysis.Results In total, 235 dentists participated, with 91% being general dentists. Half had previously prescribed OBZs, with 36% doing so in the last year. Only 18% were confident in their use. Diazepam was the anxiolytic preferred by respondents. Two-thirds of dentists who had never prescribed anxiolytics were interested in doing so in the future. Concerns about managing anxious patients with OBZs included: inadequate training; confusion about guidelines; medico-legal risk; and issues of general practitioners prescribing anxiolytics to dental patients unbeknown to their dentist.Conclusions A lack of confidence prescribing OBZs for anxiolysis exists among UK dentists. Guidelines should be clarified, and training provided.

Effect of Superstitious Beliefs and Risk Intuitions on Genetic Test Decisions.

INTRODUCTION: Moving beyond numeric representations of risk perceptions, we examine cognitive causation, or superstitious thinking, and negative affect in risk as predictors of MC1R (i.e., moderate v. high risk) skin cancer genetic testing and responses to this testing. METHODS: Participants (N = 496) completed baseline assessments using validated measures of cognitive causation (beliefs that thinking about cancer risk increases cancer likelihood) and negative affect in risk (negative feelings generated during risk perception) and subsequently received a test offer. Participants could access a website to learn about and request genetic testing. Those who tested (n = 167) completed assessments of cognitive and affective reactions 2 wk after testing, including the Impact of Events-Revised Intrusive thoughts subscale. RESULTS: Those with higher negative affect in risk were less likely to return a saliva sample for testing (odds ratio = 0.98, 95% confidence interval = 0.96-0.99). Those with higher cognitive causation reported more fear (b = 0.28-0.31; P's < 0.05). Higher negative affect in risk was associated with more emotion-laden test responses, particularly in those receiving higher-risk as compared with average-risk results. CONCLUSION: Negative affect in risk did not hamper test information seeking, although it did inhibit the uptake of genetic testing. Those with higher cognitive causation showed more fear regarding their test result, as indicated by higher distress in those who received average-risk results and lower believability in those who received higher-risk results.

Comprehension of skin cancer genetic risk feedback in primary care patients.

Few studies have examined comprehension and miscomprehension of genetic risk feedback for moderate-risk genes in the general population. We examined the prevalence and nature of accurate and inaccurate genetic risk feedback comprehension among those who received genetic testing for melanocortin-1-receptor (MC1R) gene variants that confer moderate melanoma risk. Participants (N = 145 Albuquerque, NM) were tested as part of a randomized controlled trial. Two weeks after receiving MC1R genetic risk feedback, participants answered open-ended questions regarding their reactions to the MC1R feedback report. Participants' comprehension of their feedback (average-risk or higher-risk for melanoma) was evaluated through qualitative analysis of open-ended responses. Most participants demonstrated comprehension of their feedback results (i.e., 63% of average-risk participants [ARPs]; 51% of higher-risk participants [HRPs]). Miscomprehension was evident in fewer participants (i.e., 16% of ARPs, 11% of HRPs). A few ARPs misunderstood the purpose of testing, whereas a few HRPs reported confusion about the meaning of their risk feedback. Some participants' responses to the open-ended questions were too ambiguous to ascertain comprehension or miscomprehension (i.e., 21% of ARPs, 38% of HRPs). Taken together, these findings suggest that genetic testing feedback for MC1R risk variants is largely comprehensible to general population participants. This study adds to the work examining comprehension and usage of common, moderate risk genetic information in public health contexts. However, to maximize the utility of genetic risk information in the general population, further research is needed to investigate and address areas where common genetic risk feedback misunderstandings occur.

"Let's Talk about Skin Cancer": Examining Association between Family Communication about Skin Cancer, Perceived Risk, and Sun Protection Behaviors.

Family communication about skin cancer risk may motivate protective behaviors. However, it is unclear how widespread such communication might be. In this study, we describe prevalence and patterns (across environmental, personal, and behavioral factors) of family communication about skin cancer across N = 600 diverse (79% female, 48% Hispanic, 44% non-Hispanic White) primary care patients from Albuquerque, New Mexico, a geographical location with year-round sun exposure. Over half reported discussing general cancer (77%) and skin cancer risks (66%) with their families. The most frequent target of skin cancer risk communication included doctors (54%), followed by friends/coworkers (49%), spouse/partner (43%), other family members (38%), sisters (36%), mothers (36%), daughters (33%), sons (32%), father (24%), and brothers (22%). On average, participants reported having talked to three family members about skin cancer risks. The most frequently discussed content of skin cancer risk communication was the use of sun protection (89%), followed by the personal risk of skin cancer (68%), who had skin cancer in the family (60%), family risk of skin cancer (59%), time of sun exposure (57%), and skin cancer screening (57%). A family or personal history of cancer, higher perceived risk, higher health literacy, being non-Hispanic, having higher education or income, and proactive sun protective behavior were associated with greater family communication about general cancer and skin cancer risks. These study findings have implications for interventions that encourage discussions about skin cancer risk, sun protection, and skin cancer screening that lead to adoption of sun-safe behaviors.

Behavioral and Psychological Outcomes Associated with Skin Cancer Genetic Testing in Albuquerque Primary Care.

Public availability of genetic information is increasing; thus, efforts to improve diversity in basic and translational research in genomics is a top priority. Given the increasing U.S. incidence and mortality of melanoma, and the prevalence of common melanocortin-1 receptor (MC1R) gene melanoma risk variants in the general population, we examined genomic testing of MC1R for skin cancer risk in a randomized controlled trial in Albuquerque, New Mexico primary care. Participants were 48% Hispanic and were randomized 5:1 to a MC1R test invitation or usual care. We assessed 3 month sun protection, skin cancer screening, and skin cancer worry outcomes associated with testing, and key effect moderators (e.g., cancer risk perceptions, and skin cancer risk factors). Our findings indicate that the primary outcomes were unchanged by the MC1R test offer, test acceptance, and level of risk feedback. Moderator analyses showed that those with lower risk perception, and those with skin that readily tans, significantly increased their sun protection in response to higher than average risk feedback. Risk feedback did not prompt cancer worry, and average risk feedback did not erode existing sun protection. This study paves the way for the development of tailored strategies to address low skin cancer risk awareness in this understudied context of public health genomics.

Effects of health literacy skills, educational attainment, and level of melanoma risk on responses to personalized genomic testing.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined how health literacy impacts responses to genetic information. METHODS: We examined this issue among 145 English or Spanish-speaking adult primary care patients enrolled in a trial that offered testing for MC1R gene variants that confer moderately increased melanoma risk. We investigated whether health literacy skills, educational attainment, or melanoma risk were related to short-term cognitive and affective responses to genetic test results. RESULTS: On average, participants found the test results to be highly believable and clear, with low levels of negative emotional responses and moderate levels of positive responses. In adjusted models, health literacy skills were significantly inversely associated with confusion (OR = 0.75, 95 % CI = 0.58, 0.96); those with higher education thought significantly less about their test results (ß = -0.66), were less hopeful (ß = -0.89), and had lower distress (ß = -1.15). We also observed a significant interaction (p < .001) between health literacy and melanoma risk in affecting the frequency of thoughts about test results. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that health literacy skills may affect to what extent individuals elaborate cognitively on genetic information. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Patients with lower health literacy skills or education may need support in understanding genetic test results.

Area-level deprivation and oral cancer in England 2012-2016.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between deprivation and oral cancer is complex. We examined magnitude and shape of deprivation-related inequalities in oral cancer in England 2012-2016. METHODS: Oral cancer was indicated by cancers of the lip and oral cavity (ICD10 C00-C06) and lip, oral cavity and pharynx (C00-C14) and deprivation by the Index of Multiple Deprivation. Deprivation inequality in incidence and mortality rates of oral cancer outcomes was measured using the Relative Index of Inequality (RII). Fractional polynomial regression was used to explore the shape of the relationships between deprivation and oral cancer outcomes. Multivariate regression models were fitted with the appropriate functions to examine the independent effect of deprivation on cancer adjusting for smoking, alcohol and ethnicity. RESULTS: Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and mortality rate ratios (MRRs) were greater for more deprived areas. The RII values indicated significant inequalities for oral cancer outcomes but the magnitude of inequalities were greater for mortality. The relationships between deprivation and oral cancer outcomes were curvilinear. Deprivation, Asian ethnicity and alcohol consumption were associated with higher incidence and mortality rates of oral cancer. CONCLUSION: This is the first study, to our knowledge, exploring the shape of socioeconomic inequalities in oral cancer at neighbourhood level. Deprivation-related inequalities were present for all oral cancer outcomes with a steeper rise at the more deprived end of the deprivation spectrum. Deprivation predicted oral cancer even after accounting for other risk factors.

Introduction of a referral pathway guide for general dental practitioners in Cheshire & Merseyside: the effect on two-week suspected cancer referrals.

Introduction In 2017, Cheshire and Merseyside Local Dental Network introduced an Oral Cancer Care Guide for dental teams, emphasising the importance of early detection, appropriate referral, and effective patient communication. This study looks at the effect on two-week-wait (TWW) referrals to one unit, following the introduction of the guide and regional educational intervention.Methods Somerset Cancer Register, provided data from two three-month cohorts of TWW suspected head and neck cancer referrals, before and after introduction of the guide.Results There were 390 and 481 referrals respectively during the two three-month time-periods. The number of general dental practitioner (GDP) referrals rose from 24 to 59 (6.2% to 12.3%, P = 0.002) following introduction of the guide. The cancer conversion rate remained the same for general practitioner (GP) referrals (6.3% and 6.2%) but was lower for GDP referrals (21% vs 12%, P = 0.31).Conclusions We observed an increase in referrals following the introduction of the guide; however, the conversion rate for GDP referrals reduced. Education and ease of referral are essential for reducing the number of advanced cancers presenting to secondary care, but more research is required to inform an improvement in specificity. Future work is required looking at the long-term impact of the guide including adaption for local GP usage.

MC1R Variation in a New Mexico Population.

BACKGROUND: The Melanocortin 1 Receptor (MC1R) contributes to pigmentation, an important risk factor for developing melanoma. Evaluating SNPs in MC1R and association with race/ethnicity, skin type, and perceived cancer risk in a New Mexico (NM) population will elucidate the role of MC1R in a multicultural population. METHODS: We genotyped MC1R in 191 NMs attending a primary care clinic in Albuquerque. We obtained individuals' self-identified race/ethnicity, skin type, and perceived cancer risk. We defined genetic risk as carriage of any one or more of the nine most common SNPs in MC1R. RESULTS: We found that one MC1R SNP, R163Q (rs885479), was identified in 47.6% of self-identified Hispanics and 12.9% of non-Hispanic whites (NHW), making Hispanics at higher "genetic risk" (as defined by carrying one of the MC1R common variants). When we deleted R163Q from analyses, Hispanics were no longer at higher genetic risk (33.3%) compared with NHW (48.3%), consistent with melanoma rates, tanning ability, and lower perceived risk. Hispanics had a perceived risk significantly lower than NHW and a nonsignificant better tanning ability than NHW. CONCLUSIONS: The R163Q variant in MC1R may not be a risk factor for melanoma among NM Hispanics. This suggestion points to the need to carefully interpret genetic risk factors among specific populations. IMPACT: Genetic risk cannot be extrapolated from Northern European populations directly to non-European populations.

Psychosocial and Cultural Determinants of Interest and Uptake of Skin Cancer Genetic Testing in Diverse Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Translational research in genomics has limited reach and requires efforts to broaden access and utility in diverse populations. Skin cancer is common and rates are rising, including among Hispanics. Germline variants in the melanocortin-1 receptor (MC1R) gene are common in the population and confer moderate risk for melanoma and basal cell cancers across skin types. Feedback about MC1R risk status may promote skin cancer risk awareness and risk reduction. AIMS: We examined the level of interest in pursuing MC1R testing, and patterns of interest across skin cancer perceived threat and control attitudes, cultural beliefs (family influence on health, health system distrust, cancer fatalism, skin cancer misconceptions), and health literacy. METHODS: We used a study website to inform primary care patients in Albuquerque, NM about the benefits and drawbacks of MC1R testing. Website logon, request of a saliva test kit, and return of the test kit (yes vs. no) were primary assessments of study interest and uptake. RESULTS: Of 499 participants provided with a test offer, 33% requested and returned the test. Lower family influence on participants' health was an important factor both overall and within ethnicity subgroups, and may indicate that primary care patients interested in skin cancer genetic testing see themselves as proactive health seekers, independent from family encouragement. Lower self-efficacy for skin cancer prevention was also an important characteristic of those who tested. CONCLUSION: As evidence for common genetic markers for skin cancer accumulates, these findings suggest characteristics of those most likely to pursue genetic testing for skin cancer risk.

I've got Toothache, I need Antibiotics: a UK Perspective on Rational Antibiotic Prescribing by Dentists.

Antibiotics do not cure toothache. This headline message of the United Kingdom's (UK) Dental Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) toolkit's posters and leaflets is aimed at patients; clinicians are expected to know this already. Evidence based clinical guidelines exist to set clear standards for good clinical practice yet there are barriers to compliance. The national AMS audit tool is designed for clinicians to review their management of acute dental conditions, including but not limited to the prescription of antibiotics. In this article we aim to help dental teams protect their patients and themselves from adverse events related to antibiotic prescription. It explores the emergent problem of Clostridium difficile, antibiotic resistance and severe sepsis, and considers some of the barriers, which clinicians have suggested, contribute to the unjustified prescription of antibiotics. Dentists must weigh the risks against the benefits before prescribing any antibiotic.

I've got toothache, i need antibiotics: a uk perspective on rational antibiotic prescribing by dentists

Abstract Antibiotics do not cure toothache. This headline message of the United Kingdom's (UK) Dental Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) toolkit's posters and leaflets is aimed at patients; clinicians are expected to know this already. Evidence based clinical guidelines exist to set clear standards for good clinical practice yet there are barriers to compliance. The national AMS audit tool is designed for clinicians to review their management of acute dental conditions, including but not limited to the prescription of antibiotics. In this article we aim to help dental teams protect their patients and themselves from adverse events related to antibiotic prescription. It explores the emergent problem of Clostridium difficile, antibiotic resistance and severe sepsis, and considers some of the barriers, which clinicians have suggested, contribute to the unjustified prescription of antibiotics. Dentists must weigh the risks against the benefits before prescribing any antibiotic.

Resumo Antibióticos não curam dor de dente. Tal mensagem, encontrada no título dos panfletos e cartazes da caixa de ferramentas Gerenciamento Antimicrobiano Odontológico (AMS) do Reino Unido, é direcionada aos pacientes; os clínicos já deveriam saber disso. Diretrizes clínicas baseadas em evidência existem para estabelecer padrões claros à boa prática clínica, ainda que existam barreiras para sua observância. A ferramenta AMS para monitoramento nacional é voltada para clínicos revisarem sua conduta frente às condições dentais agudas, inclusive mas não limitada à prescrição de antibióticos. Neste artigo, visa-se colaborar com equipes odontológicas a fim de protegerem a si e a seus pacientes contra situações adversas relacionadas ao uso de antibióticos. Explora-se o problema emergente do Clostridium difficile, resistência bacteriana a antimicrobianos e sepsis severa, além de considerar algumas das barreiras que clínicos têm sugerido como geradoras de prescrições inapropriadas de antibióticos. Os dentistas devem pesar riscos e benefícios antes de prescrever qualquer antibiótico.

One-to-one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour.

BACKGROUND: The dental care setting is an appropriate place to deliver dietary assessment and advice as part of patient management. However, we do not know whether this is effective in changing dietary behaviour. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of one-to-one dietary interventions for all ages carried out in a dental care setting in changing dietary behaviour. The effectiveness of these interventions in the subsequent changing of oral and general health is also assessed. SEARCH METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 24 January 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 24 January 2012), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 24 January 2012), CINAHL via EBSCO (1982 to 24 January 2012), PsycINFO via OVID (1967 to 24 January 2012), and Web of Science (1945 to 12 April 2011). We also undertook an electronic search of key conference proceedings (IADR and ORCA between 2000 and 13 July 2011). Reference lists of relevant articles, thesis publications (Dissertations Abstracts Online 1861 to 2011) were searched. The authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify any unpublished work. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of one-to-one dietary interventions delivered in a dental care setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Abstract screening, eligibility screening and data extraction decisions were all carried out independently and in duplicate by two review authors. Consensus between the two opinions was achieved by discussion, or involvement of a third review author. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Two of these were multi-intervention studies where the dietary intervention was one component of a wider programme of prevention, but where data on dietary behaviour change were reported. One of the single intervention studies was concerned with dental caries prevention. The other two concerned general health outcomes. There were no studies concerned with dietary change aimed at preventing tooth erosion. In four out of the five included studies a significant change in dietary behaviour was found for at least one of the primary outcome variables. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that one-to-one dietary interventions in the dental setting can change behaviour, although the evidence is greater for interventions aiming to change fruit/vegetable and alcohol consumption than for those aiming to change dietary sugar consumption. There is a need for more studies, particularly in the dental practice setting, as well as greater methodological rigour in the design, statistical analysis and reporting of such studies.

A qualitative investigation of the influence of time since graduation on English dentists' approach to the care of young children.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, general dental practitioners (GDPs) provide the majority of dental care to young children. The approach to undergraduate teaching of paediatric dentistry varies across UK dental schools. There is no understanding of how undergraduate teaching influences practice in the first few years after qualification and how this influence behaves over time as dentists mature as clinicians. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to gain a deeper understanding of the influence of time since graduation on how GDPs manage the dental care of their child patients. DESIGN: A qualitative study, with three interviewers conducted 93 interviews with GDPs practising in the north-west of England. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and content analysis was used with the purpose of identifying themes from the data. RESULTS: Findings showed that formal postgraduate education was not a great influence upon the GDPs' approach to care over time. Change in approach was influenced by experiential learning over a GDP's career and external influences such as policy change, but this was not underpinned by any formal reflective practice. CONCLUSIONS: Education is just one of many influences on clinical practice over the whole of a clinician's career. A gradual change in clinical practice is influenced by the personal experience of dentists treating children.