Promoting openness to autism amongst dental care professional students.

INTRODUCTION: Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is a lifelong condition affecting communication and social interaction, characterised by repetitive or repeated patterns of behaviour. People with ASD experience poor systemic and oral health. They face reduced access to dental care related to provider barriers associated with lack of understanding of ASD, lack of training and a consequent reluctance to treat people with ASD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The effectiveness of training given by a person with autism to student dental care professionals was evaluated by measuring change in 62 students' openness to autism scale scores and confidence treating a person with autism. These students included third year dental students and second year dental nursing and hygiene students. This cohort was recruited as part of their curriculum and opted in for inclusion in the study. Data were analysed using SPSS®. RESULTS: An increase in openness scale scores of 7.6% (p < .05) and in confidence of 4.9% (p < .05) between pre- and post-training was observed. Openness scale score predicted level of confidence at baseline (OR = 0.21 (95% CI = 0.02-0.39)). CONCLUSION: An educational intervention delivered by a person with autism promoted modest increases in openness towards autism and confidence amongst dental care pre-service professionals. Whilst the results suggest that peer-led dental care professional teaching by people with autism may be beneficial, more research is needed.

How dentists learn behaviour support skills for adults with intellectual developmental disorders: A qualitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: An understanding of how dentists develop patient support techniques for use with adults with intellectual developmental disorders (IDD) may lead to a better understanding of how these techniques can be taught. In this study, we explored how skilled dentists developed non-physical, non-pharmacological patient support techniques (nPSTs) for use with adults with IDD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adopting a qualitative descriptive design, a synchronous online group interview was undertaken with six dentists. Informants were subsequently contacted in pairs, or individually, for further interview. All data were analysed using thematic content analysis. Author biases and rigour are considered. RESULTS: Three categories emerged: Motivation to learn; Formal learning; and Informal learning, and the latter had three subcategories: Observation; Trial; and error and Experience. Motivators to learn PST skills included perceived empathy and a sense of responsibility towards patients with IDD. Formal undergraduate learning was lacking leaving dentists to rely on paediatric training "A paediatric model from your training… needs to be restructured and re-emphasised with people with disabilities as they progress through the lifespan.", whereas specialist training was reported to be helpful where available. Over time, practitioners developed an individualised skillset through observation, trial and error and experience. "You learn. Just like any job, you learn on the job. You learn a lot from experience and mistakes." DISCUSSION: Essential patient support skills appear to be acquired in an ad hoc manner. How dentists learn their skills has implications for dental training for future and current dental professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Specific recommendations to improve education are made.

Oral hygiene interventions for people with intellectual disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Periodontal (gum) disease and dental caries (tooth decay) are the most common causes of tooth loss; dental plaque plays a major role in the development of these diseases. Effective oral hygiene involves removing dental plaque, for example, by regular toothbrushing. People with intellectual disabilities (ID) can have poor oral hygiene and oral health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of oral hygiene interventions, specifically the mechanical removal of plaque, for people with intellectual disabilities (ID). SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases to 4 February 2019: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Cochrane Register of Studies), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid and PsycINFO Ovid. ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. The Embase search was restricted by date due to the Cochrane Centralised Search Project, which makes available clinical trials indexed in Embase through CENTRAL. We handsearched specialist conference abstracts from the International Association of Disability and Oral Health (2006 to 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and some types of non-randomised studies (NRS) (non-RCTs, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series studies and repeated measures studies) that evaluated oral hygiene interventions targeted at people with ID or their carers, or both. We used the definition of ID in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision (ICD-10). We defined oral hygiene as the mechanical removal of plaque. We excluded studies that evaluated chemical removal of plaque, or mechanical and chemical removal of plaque combined. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently screened search records, identified relevant studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and judged the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE criteria. We contacted study authors for additional information if required. We reported RCTs and NRSs separately. MAIN RESULTS: We included 19 RCTs and 15 NRSs involving 1795 adults and children with ID and 354 carers. Interventions evaluated were: special manual toothbrushes, electric toothbrushes, oral hygiene training, scheduled dental visits plus supervised toothbrushing, discussion of clinical photographs showing plaque, varied frequency of toothbrushing, plaque-disclosing agents and individualised care plans. We categorised results as short (six weeks or less), medium (between six weeks and 12 months) and long term (more than 12 months).Most studies were small; all were at overall high or unclear risk of bias. None of the studies reported quality of life or dental caries. We present below the evidence available from RCTs (or NRS if the comparison had no RCTs) for gingival health (inflammation and plaque) and adverse effects, as well as knowledge and behaviour outcomes for the training studies.Very low-certainty evidence suggested a special manual toothbrush (the Superbrush) reduced gingival inflammation (GI), and possibly plaque, more than a conventional toothbrush in the medium term (GI: mean difference (MD) -12.40, 95% CI -24.31 to -0.49; plaque: MD -0.44, 95% CI -0.93 to 0.05; 1 RCT, 18 participants); brushing was carried out by the carers. In the short term, neither toothbrush showed superiority (GI: MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.77 to 0.57; plaque: MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.85; 1 RCT, 25 participants; low- to very low-certainty evidence).Moderate- and low-certainty evidence found no difference between electric and manual toothbrushes for reducing GI or plaque, respectively, in the medium term (GI: MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.09; plaque: standardised mean difference 0.29, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.65; 2 RCTs, 120 participants). Short-term findings were inconsistent (4 RCTs; low- to very low-certainty evidence).Low-certainty evidence suggested training carers in oral hygiene care had no detectable effect on levels of GI or plaque in the medium term (GI: MD -0.09, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.45; plaque: MD -0.07, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.13; 2 RCTs, 99 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggested oral hygiene knowledge of carers was better in the medium term after training (MD 0.69, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.06; 2 RCTs, 189 participants); this was not found in the short term, and results for changes in behaviour, attitude and self-efficacy were mixed.One RCT (10 participants) found that training people with ID in oral hygiene care reduced plaque but not GI in the short term (GI: MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.90 to 0.34; plaque: MD -0.47, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.02; very low-certainty evidence).One RCT (304 participants) found that scheduled dental recall visits (at 1-, 3- or 6-month intervals) plus supervised daily toothbrushing were more likely than usual care to reduce GI (pocketing but not bleeding) and plaque in the long term (low-certainty evidence).One RCT (29 participants) found that motivating people with ID about oral hygiene by discussing photographs of their teeth with plaque highlighted by a plaque-disclosing agent, did not reduce plaque in the medium term (very low-certainty evidence).One RCT (80 participants) found daily toothbrushing by dental students was more effective for reducing plaque in people with ID than once- or twice-weekly toothbrushing in the short term (low-certainty evidence).A benefit to gingival health was found by one NRS that evaluated toothpaste with a plaque-disclosing agent and one that evaluated individualised oral care plans (very low-certainty evidence).Most studies did not report adverse effects; of those that did, only one study considered them as a formal outcome. Some studies reported participant difficulties using the electric or special manual toothbrushes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although some oral hygiene interventions for people with ID show benefits, the clinical importance of these benefits is unclear. The evidence is mainly low or very low certainty. Moderate-certainty evidence was available for only one finding: electric and manual toothbrushes were similarly effective for reducing gingival inflammation in people with ID in the medium term. Larger, higher-quality RCTs are recommended to endorse or refute the findings of this review. In the meantime, oral hygiene care and advice should be based on professional expertise and the needs and preferences of the individual with ID and their carers.

Total tooth loss without denture wear is a risk indicator for difficulty eating among older adults with intellectual disabilities.

OBJECTIVES: This study tests whether total tooth loss is a risk indicator for difficulty eating among a population with intellectual disability and whether complete denture wear mediates this risk. METHODS: Dentate status and difficulty eating were reported for a Nationally representative sample of 690 adults over forty with intellectual disabilities as part of The Intellectual Disability Supplement to The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (IDS-TILDA). A logistic regression model tested the relationship between the Difficulty eating and Dentate status, controlling for the effects of other factors. RESULTS: Of the 690 participants, 505 had some teeth (Group 1), 56 had no teeth and reported wearing dentures (Group 2) and 129 had no teeth, not using dentures (Group 3). A parsimonious regression model was developed including all 406 cases with no missing data. Adjusting for the effects of other factors, it was found that, compared to Group 1, the odds of difficulty eating was twice as great (OR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.02-4.03) among people without teeth, not using dentures (Group 3). Conversely, edentulous participants who had dentures (Group 2) had far lower odds (OR = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.06-0.64) of reporting difficulty eating compared with Group 1. CONCLUSIONS: For adults with ID, total tooth loss was predictive of difficulty eating only when untreated. People with disabilities should be encouraged to maintain a functional dentition through preventive and conservative treatment. When adults with ID become edentulous, oral rehabilitation may reduce the risk of difficulty eating. Dental assessment should be undertaken if people with ID present with difficulty eating.

Experiences of dental behaviour support techniques: A qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about patients' or carers' reported experiences of dental care provided using dental behaviour support (DBS) techniques. Qualitative literature can provide unique insight into these experiences. AIM: To explore and synthesize qualitative literature related to patient experience of dental behaviour support. METHODS: A PROSPERO-registered systematic review of qualitative articles was undertaken. Studies were identified through MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. Abstracts were screened by two reviewers and data were extracted to summarize the qualitative findings included within them. A thematic summary approach was used to synthesize the qualitative data identified. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included. Studies primarily explored experiences of dental care of children by speaking to their parents (n = 16), particularly regarding paediatric dental general anaesthesia (DGA) (n = 8). Studies of adults' experiences of DBS (n = 7) covered a range of techniques. Nine studies explored broader dental care experiences and did not study specific DBS approaches. A thematic synthesis identified five themes applicable across the studies identified: Trust and the therapeutic alliance supporting effective care delivery; considered information sharing often alleviated anticipatory anxiety; control and autonomy-reduced anxieties; variations in the perceived treatment successes and failures of DBS techniques; and DBS techniques produced longer positive and negative impacts on patients beyond direct care provision. CONCLUSION: Qualitative research has been under-utilized in research on DBS techniques. Care experiences of most DBS techniques outside of paediatric DGA are poorly understood. Building trust with patients and enabling autonomy appear to support positive patient-reported experiences of care.

A scoping review of interventions and outcome measures in trials of dental behavior support.

BACKGROUND: Dental behavior support (DBS) describes all techniques used by dental professionals to ensure that dental care is safe, effective, and acceptable. There is a need to standardize outcome measures across DBS techniques to reduce heterogeneity, limit selective reporting, promote consistency, and optimize outcomes across DBS research. A comprehensive review of existing measures is a prerequisite to understanding potential outcomes related to the area of interest. AIM: This review had three aims: first, to identify the outcome measures (OMs) reported in trials of dental behavior support; second, to categorize the component DBS techniques reported within interventions according to emerging agreed terminology; and, third, to map outcome measures to intervention type. METHODS: A scoping review of trials evaluating DBS techniques was undertaken from 2012 to 2022. The review was prospectively registered. Studies were identified through Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO. Study abstracts were screened by two reviewers. Data were extracted by single selector. Outcome measures were sorted according to measurement domains (physiological, behavioral, psychological, and treatment). Responses were assimilated and summed to produce a refined list of distinguishable outcome measures. Intervention types were categorized according to accepted descriptors. Frequencies were presented; associations between outcome domain and DBS type were also reported (Chi-square test of independence). RESULTS: A total of 344 trials were included in the review from an initial 14,793 titles / title and abstracts screened. Most involved children (n = 215), most were from India (n = 104), involving basic dental care (n = 117). The median number of outcome measures per trial was four (range = 1-12); 1,317 individual outcomes were reported, categorized as: psychological (n = 501, 38.0%); physiological (n = 491, 37.3%), behavioral (n = 123, 9.3%) or, treatment-related (n = 202, 15.3%). DBS interventions were split between 239 (45.7%) pharmacological and 283 (54.1%) non-pharmacological; 96.6% of interventions mapped to accepted descriptors. A significant relationship was noted between the type of intervention and the outcome domain reported. CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate massive variation in outcome measures of DBS interventions that likely lead to unnecessary heterogeneity, selective reporting, and questionable relevance in the literature. A large range of DBS interventions were mapped according to BeSiDe list. There is a need for consensus on a core outcome set across the spectrum of DBS techniques.

Behaviour support in dentistry: A Delphi study to agree terminology in behaviour management.

OBJECTIVES: Dental behaviour support (DBS) describes all specific techniques practiced to support patients in their experience of professional oral healthcare. DBS is roughly synonymous with behaviour management, which is an outdated concept. There is no agreed terminology to specify the techniques used to support patients who receive dental care. This lack of specificity may lead to imprecision in describing, understanding, teaching, evaluating and implementing behaviour support techniques in dentistry. Therefore, this e-Delphi study aimed to develop a list of agreed labels and descriptions of DBS techniques used in dentistry and sort them according to underlying principles of behaviour. METHODS: Following a registered protocol, a modified e-Delphi study was applied over two rounds with a final consensus meeting. The threshold of consensus was set a priori at 75%. Agreed techniques were then categorized by four coders, according to behavioural learning theory, to sort techniques according to their mechanism of action. RESULTS: The panel (n = 35) agreed on 42 DBS techniques from a total of 63 candidate labels and descriptions. Complete agreement was achieved regarding all labels and descriptions, while agreement was not achieved regarding distinctiveness for 17 techniques. In exploring underlying principles of learning, it became clear that multiple and differing principles may apply depending on the specific context and procedure in which the technique may be applied. DISCUSSION: Experts agreed on what each DBS technique is, what label to use, and their description, but were less likely to agree on what distinguishes one technique from another. All techniques were describable but not comprehensively categorizable according to principles of learning. While objective consistency was not attained, greater clarity and consistency now exists. The resulting list of agreed terminology marks a significant foundation for future efforts towards understanding DBS techniques in research, education and clinical care.

Dental extractions do not predict further use of dental general anesthesia in people with disabilities: A longitudinal analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This paper describes treatments completed under dental general anesthesia (DGA) for a cohort of adults with disabilities. This patient cohort was followed up a number of years later to determine outcomes and identify factors that predict further use of DGA. METHODS: A retrospective patient record review and cross-sectional survey was carried out on a convenience sample of 64 patients who had previously received dental treatment under general anesthesia. Patient record review extracted data on patient demographics and treatment provided under DGA. Cross-sectional survey a number of years post-DGA collected data on oral care habits and current oral health based on a standardized clinical examination. Statistical analysis was carried out to identify predictors of repeat DGA. RESULTS: Participants received extensive treatment under DGA including preventive care, restorations, extractions, and root canal treatment. At follow-up 89.1% of participants had gingival disease and 56.3% had active dental caries. The mean number of teeth present was 21.2 (SD 6.9, range 6-32). Only caries risk status was found to be a significant predictor (p = 0.03) with those with a high caries risk status 6.9 times (95%CI 1.2-39.3) more likely to receive a second DGA. CONCLUSIONS: Dentists extract teeth for people with disabilities under DGA in the mistaken belief that this will avoid the need for further DGA. This study found that extraction of teeth does not prevent the need for repeated episodes of DGA. Therefore, dentists should stop extracting teeth for this reason. Rather, if dentists want to avoid further DGA, they should do the basics well: consistent, evidence-based caries risk assessment and risk reduction.

Using realist methods for intervention development to fill a methodological gap: A case study showing the development of an oral hygiene intervention for people with intellectual developmental disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Realist methods offer a novel approach to intervention design. Such novelty is needed for effective oral health promotion interventions with people with intellectual developmental disabilities (IDD) and their carers because existing interventions are poorly described and lack theoretical underpinning. In this study, the steps between inception and final intervention development are presented, with an aim to expand understanding of how realist theorizing can be used to develop interventions, and to demonstrate theory-driven intervention development in the field of oral health promotion. METHODS: In this intervention development study, the use of realist methods to develop an intervention aiming to improve the oral hygiene of people with IDD is presented. Realist theories (RTs) arising from a mixed synthesis were used to develop the Keep My Teeth intervention. The use of realist theory in intervention development was mapped across seven domains and 18 actions with emphasis on how theory informed key actions. RESULTS: Realist theories informed many but not all actions in the development process. Where gaps arose, this was augmented with other systems of intervention development, such as the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) systems. The resulting intervention and underlying theory are presented using TiDieR criteria. CONCLUSIONS: It is demonstrated how realist methods could be integrated with substantive theory when developing an intervention. RTs enhanced the contextualization of the intervention that was developed but were insufficient in their own right to guide the development process from conception to intervention. This was overcome by augmenting with substantive theory, in this case, using the BCW and BCT behaviour change systems, to select and specify the behaviours that needed to change. In essence, the BCTs guided which techniques to select, while the RTs guided how to develop and intervene. Robust intervention development in the field of oral health promotion is also presented in this study.

Keep My Teeth: An evaluation of multi-disciplinary training in mouth care for people with intellectual developmental disorders.

AIM: To evaluate a modular didactic training intervention called Keep My Teeth designed by special care dentists, for a range of healthcare students to provide oral homecare for people with intellectual developmental disorders (PwIDD). METHODS: To evaluate the intervention a one-group pre-test post-test pre-experimental research design was utilized. The intervention was delivered by virtual platforms or face-to-face, with a sub-sample of participants also receiving practical training. Healthcare students included Speech and Language Therapy (SLT), Registered Nurse Intellectual Disability (RNID), Dental Science (DS), Dental Nursing (DN), and Dental Hygiene (DH). RESULTS: Sixty-three of the 147 trainees completed all surveys. A significant change in perspective on barriers was seen for most groups post-training, with an increase in confidence in delivering oral care to PwIDD across disciplines; 67% of DH/DN students who took part in the practical training felt that the didactic training was just as effective without the practical training, while 42% of the DS students felt that was true. CONCLUSIONS: The training interventions provided seem to have increased the awareness of study participants in relation to barriers to care, and increased their self-efficacy towards, and intention to perform, oral homecare behaviors.

Labels and descriptions of dental behaviour support techniques: A scoping review of clinical practice guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: There is no agreed taxonomy of the techniques used to support patients to receive professional oral healthcare. This lack of specification leads to imprecision in describing, understanding, teaching and implementing behaviour support techniques in dentistry (DBS). METHODS: This review aims to identify the labels and associated descriptors used by practitioners to describe DBS techniques, as a first step in developing a shared terminology for DBS techniques. Following registration of a protocol, a scoping review limited to Clinical Practice Guidelines only was undertaken to identify the labels and descriptors used to refer to DBS techniques. RESULTS: From 5317 screened records, 30 were included, generating a list of 51 distinct DBS techniques. General anaesthesia was the most commonly reported DBS (n = 21). This review also explores what term is given to DBS techniques as a group (Behaviour management was most commonly used (n = 8)) and how these techniques were categorized (mainly distinguishing between pharmacological and non-pharmacological). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first attempt to generate a list of techniques that can be selected for patients and marks an initial step in future efforts at agreeing and categorizing these techniques into an accepted taxonomy, with all the benefits this brings to research, education, practice and patients.

Dental decision-making under general anesthesia for patients with disabilities: A qualitative study.

AIMS: This paper explores the variables which influence decision-making processes in dentists providing dental care for people with disabilities under general anesthesia (GA). METHODS: Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were undertaken on a purposive sample. Audio recordings were transcribed and checked for accuracy. Using thematic content analysis methods open codes were developed inductively. Codes were analyzed further by three authors adopting a deductive approach, leading to final coding, sorting and themes, subtheme and framework development. RESULTS: Three themes emerged. The first theme explored Shared Decision Making, or lack thereof, as it influenced clinical reasoning. The second (Systematic, Analytical) and third (Intuition, and heuristics) themes explored features of clinical judgment as considered under dual process theory. Dentists primarily used intuitive decision-making processes and heuristic styled processes (or cognitive mental frames) assisted in intuition to extract teeth, without engaging type 2 processes. CONCLUSION: The dentists experience subtle modifiers to their decision-making that ultimately promote extraction of teeth under GA for people with disabilities. Bias training, simulation and post-hoc reflection are examples of recommendations which may be used to improve decision-making in this area.

BeSiDe time to move behavior support in dentistry from an art to a science: A position paper from the BeSiDe (Behavior Support in Dentistry) Group.

AIMS: To share the need for agreement in terminology around how people are supported to receive dental care. METHOD: In this position paper, we make the case for a shift in behavior support in dentistry from an art to a science. RESULTS: We outline why we need agreement on the definition of behavior support across dentistry, agreement on underlying theory, aims and values, and why we need agreement on terms for specific techniques. CONCLUSIONS: We share how patients and dental teams can benefit through better science, education and practice of dental behaviour support.

The Impact of the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Providing Special Care Dentistry: A Survey for Dentists.

This study aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the experiences of special care dentistry providers worldwide. An online survey was administered from 10 to 31 July 2020. Age, sex, years of professional activity, COVID-19 status, geographical area of origin and length of lockdown period were recorded for all participating dentists. The relationships between these variables and the changes in clinical activity, the treated patients' COVID-19 status and the implementation of protective measures in the dental clinic were analyzed. A total of 436 (70.6% women) dentists from 59 countries responded to the survey. Clinical activity was reduced or stopped for 79.1% of respondents. The most common change was to limit treatment to urgent care only (53.7%). Treatment under general anesthesia or deep sedation was discontinued (51.0%) or reduced (35.8%) for the majority of respondents. Male dentists were more likely to maintain their clinical activity than female dentists (p < 0.001), and respondents from North America were more likely to do so than participants from other geographical regions (p < 0.001). Dentists from Latin America and the Caribbean were more likely to report treatment of confirmed cases of COVID-19 than those from Europe (p < 0.001). The implementation of protective measures in the dental office was determined by the survey participant's sex, intensity of clinical activity and geographical area of origin. To conclude, the provision of special care dentistry was considerably reduced in response to the pandemic. Service maintenance was mainly related to the geographical area in which the surveyed dentists worked, further exacerbating pre-existing inequalities.

Nonpharmacological techniques to support patients with intellectual developmental disorders to receive dental treatment: A systematic review of behavior change techniques.

AIMS: To identify the nonpharmacological patient-support techniques (nPSTs) reported, used or recommended for people with intellectual-developmental-disorders (IDD) to receive dental treatment; to identify their active ingredients and evaluate their effectiveness by adopting an existing taxonomy of behavior-change techniques (BCTs). METHODS AND RESULTS: Following a protocol, a search strategy was undertaken using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Cinahl, and Psychinfo (EBSCO). Selection criteria were applied, with review and extraction in duplicate. A comprehensive list of nPSTs were identified and coded by their constituent behavior-change techniques (BCTs), where BCT-taxonomy-Version-1 criteria were satisfied. Quality assessment was undertaken and effectiveness of BCTs reported. From 915 screened articles, 23 were included. In 207 instances nPSTs were identified, representing 46 distinct nPST techniques, such as positive-reinforcement (n = 18) and tell-show-do (n = 9). Of the 207 nPST codes, 135 were coded as BCTs (65.2%). The most commonly coded BCT was demonstration of the behavior (BCT6.1; n = 25). Considering studies of interventions (n = 11), all were at moderate to critical risk of bias. No interventions or outcome measures were comparable across studies. CONCLUSION: This is the first review to bring together techniques dentists use in practice and theory-driven BCTs. A significant overlap between nPSTs and BCTs was evident supporting the use of BCT taxonomy to code dental interventions. No strong evidence supporting any intervention was identified.

The complexity of tooth brushing among older adults with intellectual disabilities: Findings from a nationally representative survey.

BACKGROUND: Adults with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (IDD) have poor oral-hygiene and oral health. A better understanding of their oral-hygiene behaviours will inform interventions to improve personal and population health. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To identify the oral hygiene behaviours undertaken by and on behalf of older people with IDD. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey from the third wave of the Intellectual Disability Supplement to The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (IDS-TILDA) undertaken 2016-2017. Frequency of oral hygiene, level of support, type of brush used and for a subsample, brushing technique are reported. Bivariate analyses adopted Pearson's Chi Square test of independence. RESULTS: The sample (N = 609) had a mean age of 59.7 years (SD = 8.8); 88.4% (n = 536) reported tooth cleaning at least daily. The majority who had teeth to clean reported using standard toothbrushes (75.9%), with a minority using electric (9.6%) or modified toothbrushes (5.9%). Of the 505 who reported cleaning teeth, 285 (48.5%) did not report any assistance, 127 (25.2%) were totally dependent on another person and 133 (26.3%) reported assisted cleaning, of whom 40.0% (n = 52) were Supervised, reminded or encouraged, 27.7% (n = 36) reported Hand-on-Hand and 23.8% (n = 31) reported Brush-after-Brush techniques. An association was detected between assistance and type of toothbrush used (p < 0.001). None was detected between assistance and frequency-of-brushing (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with IDD present with a complex mix of supports, toothbrushes and techniques. This highlights the complexity of oral-hygiene behaviour for this population and indicates the need for bespoke individual care plans and complexity in interventions to improve population oral-hygiene.

Prevalence of edentulism among adults with intellectual disabilities: A narrative review informed by systematic review principles.

AIM: This review reports the prevalence of edentulism among adults with intellectual disabilities (IDs) in the literature. METHODS: A systematic search strategy led to the screening of 1,089 titles and abstracts from PubMed and six additional articles. Inclusion criteria were applied. An estimate of the prevalence of edentulism was calculated. RESULTS: Nineteen studies (from 20 publications) met inclusion criteria: eighteen were cross-sectional surveys. Sample sizes ranged from 50 to 9,620 (n = 23,853). Samples were heterogeneous, with four studies drawing from Special Olympics Special Smiles (n = 14,862); nine from institutions (n = 2,447); five from disability registers (n = 1,812) and one patient cohort (n = 4,732). By pooling the participants of all the studies reviewed, 6.6% of people with IDs were found to be edentulous. This is similar to the general population. This conceals the fact that the prevalence of edentulism varied greatly across studies (0-50%), by age and across sampling techniques adopted. CONCLUSIONS: Much like for the general population, edentulism should be seen as a key measure of disease experience and management. Such focus is needed to reduce the prevalence of edentulism for people with IDs globally. This can only be measured by adopting representative samples, which include people with IDs.

Why do edentulous adults with intellectual disabilities not wear dentures? Wave 2 of the IDS TILDA cohort study.

PURPOSE: Older adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) are often edentulous. When total tooth loss occurs, they are very unlikely to wear complete removable dentures (CRDs) to restore oral function in Ireland. The reasons for this are unclear, though opinion holds that this is because dentists do not offer prosthodontic treatment to this group. In this study we ask edentulous older adults with ID why they do not wear dentures. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data from Wave 2 of the Intellectual Disability Supplement to The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (IDS-TILDA) was examined to study reported denture wear among edentulous older adults with ID. RESULTS: Out of 692 participants, 186 were edentulous (26.9%), of whom 57 (30.6%) wore CRDs and 129 (69.3%) did not. Twelve of this 129 had dentures but did not wear them. Of the 117 respondents who reported that they did not have dentures, 99 (valid %=92.5%) did not want dentures, while only 8 did. No respondents in this study reported that they were denied denture therapy. Rather, they simply did not want dentures. Clinicians should understand that extra steps may be needed to ensure that consent is truly informed when patients opt for, or decline, complete denture therapy. CONCLUSION: While there is a high normative need for prosthodontic rehabilitation, expressed need is low. Extra steps may be necessary to ensure optimal outcomes for people with ID.