Exploring the experiences and perspectives of women on oral health during pregnancy: A qualitative study in Tasmania, Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To explore women's oral health experiences and barriers to dental care and identify potential strategies to improve oral health during pregnancy. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study design was used. Purposively elected antepartum and postpartum women ≥18 years of age from Tasmania, Australia, were recruited using maximum variation sampling. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and all qualitative data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: Fifteen women were interviewed with a mean ± SD age of 32.3 ± 4.5 years. Three key themes were generated from the data that described women's perceived changes in their oral health during pregnancy; barriers to oral health care during and after pregnancy; and perceived strategies to improve access to care. Most women acknowledged the importance of maintaining good oral health but reported a decline in their oral health status during pregnancy. Women also identified several barriers to dental care, including treatment costs, competing maternal priorities, limited oral health knowledge and negative perceptions towards dentistry. The provision of preventative oral health care by ANC providers was also limited. Community awareness, patient education resources and assessment tools could support the promotion of oral health care. Women also perceived that interprofessional collaboration between antenatal and dental providers played a key role in promoting oral health. CONCLUSION: This study explored women's varied oral health experiences and perceptions during pregnancy and highlighted critical barriers and enablers to dental care. Policy-level strategies that promote interprofessional collaboration between antenatal and dental providers and expand dental care access are suggested to overcome barriers to oral health for women during pregnancy.

Clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements for antenatal oral healthcare: An assessment of their methodological quality and content of recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: To review the content of recommendations within antenatal oral healthcare guidance documents and appraise the quality of their methodology to inform areas of development, clinical practice, and research focus. METHOD: A systematic search of five electronic databases, Google search engine, and databases from relevant professional and guideline development groups published in English, developed countries, and between 2010 and 2020 was undertaken to identify guidance documents related to antenatal oral healthcare. Quality of documents was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II tool, and a 3-step quality cut-off value was used. Inductive thematic analysis was employed to categories discreet recommendations into themes. RESULTS: Six guidelines and one consensus statement were analysed. Two documents developed within Australia scored ≥60% across five of the six domains of the quality appraisal tool and were recommended for use. Four documents (developed in the United States and Canada) were recommended for use with modifications, whilst one document (developed in Europe) was not recommended. A total of 98 discreet recommendations were identified and demonstrated considerable unanimity but differed in scope and level of information. The main content and number of recommendations were inductively categorised within the following clinical practice points: risk factor assessments (n = 2), screening and assessment (n = 10), pre-pregnancy care (referral, n = 1), antenatal care (health education and advice, n = 14; management of nausea and vomiting, n = 7; referral, n = 2), postnatal care (health education and advice, n = 1; anticipatory guidance, n = 6), documentation (n = 4), coordinated care (n = 4), capacity building (n = 6), and community engagement (n = 1). CONCLUSION: The methodological rigour of included guidance documents revealed areas of strengths and limitations and posit areas for improvement. Further research could centre on adapting antenatal oral healthcare guidelines and consensus statements to local contexts. More high-quality studies examining interventions within antenatal oral healthcare are needed to support the development of recommendations.

Factors Influencing the Provision of Oral Health Care Practices by Antenatal Care Providers: A Systematic Review.

Background: Antenatal care (ANC) providers are recommended to promote oral health care during pregnancy through the provision of oral health care practices, but studies have indicated that providers remain unclear and inconstant in adopting these practices into routine care. Therefore, the objectives were to undertake a systematic review of the current oral health care practices of ANC providers and identify factors (barriers and facilitators) that influence the provision of ANC providers' oral health care practices. Methods: Qualitative and quantitative studies were systematically searched within four databases (database inception, October 2020). Studies were selected if they were published in English and conducted in developed countries. Thematic analysis was employed where reported barriers and facilitators from the included studies were grouped by themes and were inductively categorized within a multilevel framework. Reported current oral health care practices were deductively categorized according to a predetermined "assess," "advise," and "refer" framework. Summative frequencies of oral health care practices, if reported, were also extracted. Results: A total of 3519 ANC providers were included across 26 studies. Rates of reported current oral health care practices among ANC providers varied considerably. The most reported barriers related to providers' limited oral health care knowledge, concerns with dental costs, and absence of organizational referral processes. The most reported facilitators related to providers' level of oral health care knowledge, patient prompt, and access to informational and educational resources. Conclusions: Further efforts are needed to address the range of barriers identified in this review and support ANC providers' clinical practice behaviors. This includes improved interprofessional education, training opportunities, and integrated health care models.