Exploring dental treatment decision-making experiences of people living with dementia and family carers.

INTRODUCTION: People living with dementia can have complex dental care needs. Dentists and patients should make treatment decisions together, yet some people living with dementia may be unable to make their own decisions about their dental care. Dental treatment decision-making and patients' experiences of this process have not been comprehensively researched. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the dental treatment decision-making perspectives and experiences of people living with dementia and their family members. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 8 people living with dementia and 17 family caregivers. A constructivist grounded theory approach was adopted, using a maximum variation sample. Qualitative data collection and analysis occurred concurrently. Data underwent initial open coding followed by more focused coding, supported by reflexive memo writing, which supported data categorisation. RESULTS: People living with dementia reported wanting to be understood as unique individuals with specific needs. All participants described wanting to be actively involved in dental treatment decisions. However, many felt that they were insufficiently involved in treatment decision-making. This perceived underinvolvement meant that some people living with dementia and family members felt the treatment outcomes they sought were neither discussed nor considered. CONCLUSION: People living with dementia and carers had specific expectations of dental care yet felt passive in decision-making despite their desire to be involved in this process. Dentists should seek to actively establish patients' preferences, regardless of mental capacity and consider these in discussions and decisions about dental treatment.

Improving the oral health of older people in care homes (TOPIC): a protocol for a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for interventions promoting oral health amongst care home residents is weak. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline NG48 aims to maintain and improve the oral health of care home residents. A co-design process that worked with residents and care home staff to understand how the NG48 guideline could be best implemented in practice has been undertaken to refine a complex intervention. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of the intervention to inform a future larger scale definitive trial. METHODS: This is a protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up that will be undertaken in 12 care homes across two sites (six in London, six in Northern Ireland). Care homes randomised to the intervention arm (n = 6) will receive the complex intervention based on the NG48 guideline, whilst care homes randomised to the control arm (n = 6) will continue with routine practice. The intervention will include a training package for care home staff to promote knowledge and skills in oral health promotion, the use of the Oral Health Assessment Tool on residents by trained care home staff, and a 'support worker assisted' daily tooth-brushing regime with toothpaste containing 1500 ppm fluoride. An average of ten residents, aged 65 years or over who have at least one natural tooth, will be recruited in each care home resulting in a recruited sample of 120 participants. Assessments will be undertaken at baseline, 6 months and 12 months, and will include a dental examination and questionnaires on general health and oral health administered by a research assistant. A parallel process evaluation involving semi-structured interviews will be undertaken to explore how the intervention could be embedded in standard practice. Rates of recruitment and retention, and intervention fidelity will also be recorded. A cost-consequence model will determine the relevance of different outcome measures in the decision-making context. DISCUSSION: The study will provide valuable information for trialists, policymakers, clinicians and care home staff on the feasibility and associated costs of oral health promotion in UK care homes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN10276613. Registered on 17th April 2020. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10276613 .

Development of a core outcome set for oral health services research involving dependent older adults (DECADE): a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Oral healthcare service provision for dependent older adults is often poor. For dental services to provide more responsive and equitable care, evidence-based approaches are needed. To facilitate future research, the development and application of a core outcome set would be beneficial. The aim of this study is to develop a core outcome set for oral health services research involving dependent older adults. METHODS: A multi-step process involving consensus methods and including key stakeholders will be undertaken. This will involve identifying potentially relevant outcomes through a systematic review of previous studies examining the effectiveness of strategies to prevent oral disease in dependent older adults, combined with semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders. Stakeholders will include dependent older adults, family members, carers, care-home managers, health professionals, researchers, dental commissioners and policymakers. To condense and prioritise the long list of outcomes generated by the systematic review and semi-structured interviews, a Delphi survey consisting of several rounds with key stakeholders, as mentioned above, will be undertaken. The 9-point Likert scale proposed by the GRADE Working Group will facilitate this consensus process. Following the Delphi survey, a face-to-face consensus meeting with key stakeholders will be conducted where the stakeholders will anonymously vote and decide on what outcomes should be included in the finalised core outcome set. DISCUSSION: Developing a core set of outcomes that are clinically and patient-centred will help improve the design, conduct and reporting of oral health services research involving dependent older adults, and ultimately strengthen the evidence base for high-quality oral health care for dependent older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with the COMET initiative on 9 January 2018 http://www.cometinitiative.org/studies/details/1081?result=true .

Treatment of periodontitis reduces systemic inflammation in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To assess the impact of periodontal treatment on systemic inflammation in type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults with type 2 diabetes (n = 83) and without diabetes (controls, n = 75) were recruited, and participants with periodontitis received periodontal treatment and 12 months' follow-up. Biomarkers for periodontal inflammation (gingival crevicular fluid interleukin-6, tumour necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1ß, interferon-γ, matrix metalloproteinase-8, matrix metalloproteinase-9, adiponectin) and serum markers of inflammation and diabetes control (glycated haemoglobin, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumour necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1ß, interferon-γ, leptin, adiponectin) were measured. Structural equation modelling was used to evaluate periodontal treatment effects on oral and systemic inflammation. RESULTS: Periodontal treatment resulted in significant improvements in clinical status and reductions in gingival crevicular fluid biomarkers from baseline to month 12. Structural equation modelling identified that, at baseline, individuals with diabetes and periodontitis had significantly higher systemic inflammation than non-diabetic controls with periodontitis (Δ = 0.20, p = .002), with no significant differences between groups for oral inflammation. There was a greater reduction in systemic inflammation following periodontal treatment in individuals with diabetes and periodontitis compared to those with periodontitis but not diabetes (Δ = -0.25, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes and periodontitis together appear to increase systemic inflammation, with evidence of reductions following periodontal treatment.

Orofacial pain assessment and management for patients with dementia: A meta-ethnography.

Delivering dental treatment for patients with dementia can be challenging, and the complexity of treatment provision can increase as dementia progresses. Treatment at the later stages of dementia can be associated with ethical challenges and procedural risk meaning that a comprehensive patient assessment is crucial; the presence of orofacial pain is a key indication for active intervention from dental teams. To explore the process of oro-facial pain assessment and management, a comprehensive review of qualitative literature was undertaken by searching six electronic databases. No literature specific to orofacial pain assessment was identified. The inclusion criteria were widened to explore assessment and management of pain in general for patients with dementia. Meta-ethnography with reciprocal translation was used to identify key concepts and themes and synthesise information applicable to the dental setting. Three major themes arose as follows: challenges with pain assessment, challenges with pain management and logistics and education. Healthcare teams struggle with pain identification in patients with dementia though many signs were identified which may suggest a patient is experiencing pain. The long-term knowledge of individual patients held by family members and care teams can allow identification of deviation from patients' normal states; this knowledge can assist healthcare professionals in determining whether to provide specific treatments or interventions. Pain assessment tools were found to be problematic and are unlikely to be a practical solution to use for complex patients in dental settings. Education for dental and wider care teams on orofacial pain would be highly valuable; yet, this needs to be based on suitable evidence.

Standardized screening for periodontitis as an integral part of multidisciplinary management of adults with type 2 diabetes: an observational cross-sectional study of cohorts in the USA and UK.

OBJECTIVE: To determine prevalence and factors predictive of periodontitis by using a standardized assessment model in adults with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed an observational cross-sectional study to determine the burden of periodontitis in adults with type 2 diabetes attending urban, ambulatory referral centers in the USA and UK. Full-mouth probing was performed and periodontitis was diagnosed based on either a low (≥5 mm at ≥1 site) or high pocket probing-depth threshold (≥6 mm at ≥1 site). Results were stratified into a five-stage schema and integrated with other clinical variables into the novel Diabetes Cross-Disciplinary Index to function as a balanced health scorecard. Corresponding demographic and routinely collected health data were obtained and comparisons were made between patients with and without periodontitis. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors predictive of the presence or absence of periodontitis. RESULTS: Between our two cohorts, 253 patients were screened. Caucasians comprised >90% and Hispanic Americans >75% of the UK and US cohorts, respectively. Males and females were equally distributed; mean age was 53.6±11 years; and 17 (6.7%) were edentulous. Of the 236 dentate patients, 128 (54.2%) had periodontitis by low threshold and 57 (24.2%) by high threshold. Just 17 (7.2%) were periodontally healthy. No significant differences in age, HbA1c, blood pressure, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or smoking status (all p>0.05) were identified between those with or without periodontitis (regardless of threshold) and none was found to be a significant predictor of disease. CONCLUSIONS: Periodontitis is frequent in adults with type 2 diabetes and all should be screened. Periodontal health status can be visualized with other comorbidities and complications using a novel balanced scorecard that could facilitate patient-clinician communication, shared decision-making, and prioritization of individual healthcare needs.

Clinical and technical considerations in the analysis of gingival crevicular fluid.

Despite the technical challenges involved when collecting, processing and analyzing gingival crevicular fluid samples, research using gingival crevicular fluid has, and will continue to play, a fundamental role in expanding our understanding of periodontal pathogenesis and healing outcomes following treatment. A review of the literature, however, clearly demonstrates that there is considerable variation in the methods used for collection, processing and analysis of gingival crevicular fluid samples by different research groups around the world. Inconsistent or inadequate reporting impairs interpretation of results, prevents accurate comparison of data between studies and potentially limits the conclusions that can be made from a larger body of evidence. The precise methods used for collection and analysis of gingival crevicular fluid (including calibration studies required before definitive clinical studies) should be reported in detail, either in the methods section of published papers or as an online supplementary file, so that other researchers may reproduce the methodology. Only with clear and transparent reporting will the full impact of future gingival crevicular fluid research be realized. This paper discusses the complexities of gingival crevicular fluid collection and analysis and provides guidance to researchers working in this field.