Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: The treatment of periodontitis begins with a non-surgical phase that includes scaling and root planing(SRP) and on occasion the use of systemic antibiotics. The goal was to systematically evaluate in systemic healthy adults the effect of the concomitant administration of amoxicillin (amx) and metronidazole (met) adjunctive to SRP compared to SRP alone. METHODS: The PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL and EMBASE databases were searched up to November 2014 to identify appropriate studies. Probing Pocket Depth (PD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL), Bleeding on Pocket Probing(BOP) and Plaque Indices(PI) were selected as outcome variables. Based on the extracted data a meta-analysis was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 526 unique articles were found, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis showed that SRP + amx + met provided significantly better effects overall and more pronounced PD reduction in periodontal pockets initially measuring >/=6 mm (DiffM:-0.86 mm, p < 0.00001) and gain in CAL(DiffM:+0.75 mm, p = 0.0001). The meta-analysis for the secondary inflammatory parameter BOP showed that SRP + amx + met provided full mouth significantly greater reduction in BOP than SRP alone (DiffM:-6.98 %, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Adjunctive systemic amoxicillin and metronidazole medication to SRP significantly improved the clinical outcomes with respect to mean PD, CAL and BOP compared to SRP alone. There is moderate to strong evidence in support of the recommendation that adjunctive amx + met therapy to SRP significantly improves the clinical outcomes, with respect to mean PD and CAL compared to SRP alone especially in initially deep (>/=6 mm) pockets. No major side effects associated with the intake of amx + met were reported. This treatment regimen is an efficacious, minimally invasive, practical and inexpensive approach for periodontitis therapy. The key components are mechanical tooth and pocket debridement, supportive treatment of the disease with systemic antibiotics and attention to proper self-care.

The World Bank will publish the nine volumes of Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition, in 2015-16. Volume 1--Essential Surgery--identifies 44 surgical procedures as essential on the basis that they address substantial needs, are cost effective, and are feasible to implement. This report summarises and critically assesses the volume's five key findings. First, provision of essential surgical procedures would avert about 1.5 million deaths a year, or 6-7% of all avertable deaths in low-income and middle-income countries. Second, essential surgical procedures rank among the most cost effective of all health interventions. The surgical platform of the first-level hospital delivers 28 of the 44 essential procedures, making investment in this platform also highly cost effective. Third, measures to expand access to surgery, such as task sharing, have been shown to be safe and effective while countries make long-term investments in building surgical and anaesthesia workforces. Because emergency procedures constitute 23 of the 28 procedures provided at first-level hospitals, expansion of access requires that such facilities be widely geographically diffused. Fourth, substantial disparities remain in the safety of surgical care, driven by high perioperative mortality rates including anaesthesia-related deaths in low-income and middle-income countries. Feasible measures, such as WHO's Surgical Safety Checklist, have led to improvements in safety and quality. Fifth, the large burden of surgical disorders, cost-effectiveness of essential surgery, and strong public demand for surgical services suggest that universal coverage of essential surgery should be financed early on the path to universal health coverage. We point to estimates that full coverage of the component of universal coverage of essential surgery applicable to first-level hospitals would require just over US$3 billion annually of additional spending and yield a benefit-cost ratio of more than 10:1. It would efficiently and equitably provide health benefits, financial protection, and contributions to stronger health systems.

Current systematic reviews are important for health care providers in supporting their evidence-based practice decisions. Equally important is the ability to determine when a new systematic review is needed in view of the rapid publication output. The current best evidence from a 2013 systematic review suggests that certain treatments may accelerate orthodontic tooth movement. Our aim was to determine if an updated systematic review is needed on this topic by applying the modified Ottawa method. A systematic search of Pubmed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases, identical to the previous systematic review, was executed. Two authors performed screening for inclusion/exclusion of studies and selected full-text articles were reviewed. Qualitative and quantitative criteria were applied to assess studies describing the following types of interventions to accelerate tooth movement: electrical, photobiomodulation, micro-osteoperforations, vibration, corticotomy, and low-level laser therapy. The Ottawa method showed that studies produced since 2011 have (1) potentially invalidating evidence and description of new methods and (2) combined new data that would enhance the precision of the existing evidence on low-level laser therapy. These collectively indicate the need for a new systematic review on adjunct procedures to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement, which may offer new evidence and techniques not previously mentioned. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

In their remarkable article, "Redefining Global Health Care Delivery," Kim et al. posit that health care delivery is the effective provision of services to people with diseases for which proven therapies exist. Polio vaccination and deworming are exemplars of place-based and population-based success stories. How might this approach be applied to other prevalent conditions worldwide? Consider dental caries, a preventable, mixed microaerophilic, Gram-positive infection. According to a new report by Marcenes et al., untreated caries in permanent teeth is the most prevalent condition worldwide, and untreated caries in primary teeth is the 10th-most prevalent condition. Sadly, however, from 1990 to 2010, the prevalence and incidence for untreated caries remained virtually unchanged. Looking ahead, with expected increases in population and longevity, the burden of untreated caries is expected to increase. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print July 16, 2015: e1. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.302746).

Data sourcesThe Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, Embase, CINAHL, National Institutes of Health Trials Register and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. Reference lists of identified articles were also scanned for relevant papers. Identified manufacturers were contacted for additional information.Study selectionOnly randomised controlled trials comparing manual and powered toothbrushes were considered. Crossover trials were eligible for inclusion if the wash-out period length was more than two weeks.Data extraction and synthesisStudy assessment and data extraction were carried out independently by at least two reviewers. The primary outcome measures were quantified levels of plaque or gingivitis. Risk of bias assessment was undertaken. Standard Cochrane methodological approaches were taken. Random-effects models were used provided there were four or more studies included in the meta-analysis, otherwise fixed-effect models were used. Data were classed as short term (one to three months) and long term (greater than three months).ResultsFifty-six trials were included with 51 (4624 patients) providing data for meta-analysis. The majority (46) were at unclear risk of bias, five at high risk of bias and five at low risk. There was moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes provide a statistically significant benefit compared with manual toothbrushes with regard to the reduction of plaque in both the short and long-term. This corresponds to an 11% reduction in plaque for the Quigley Hein index (Turesky) in the short term and a 21% reduction in the long term. There was a high degree of heterogeneity that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups.There was also moderate quality evidence that powered toothbrushes again provide a statistically significant reduction in gingivitis when compared with manual toothbrushes both in the short and long term. This corresponds to a 6% and 11% reduction in gingivitis for the Loe and Silness indices respectively. Again there was a high degree of heterogeneity that was not explained by the different powered toothbrush type subgroups. The greatest body of evidence was for rotation oscillation brushes which demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in plaque and gingivitis at both time points.ConclusionsPowered toothbrushes reduce plaque and gingivitis more than manual toothbrushing in the short and long term. The clinical importance of these findings remains unclear. Observation of methodological guidelines and greater standardisation of design would benefit both future trials and meta-analyses. Cost, reliability and side effects were inconsistently reported. Any reported side effects were localised and only temporary.

Data sourcesThe PubMed and Embase databases were searched together with hand searching of the Journal of Periodontology, Journal of Periodontal Research and Journal of Clinical Periodontology. The reference lists of identified articles were also searched.Study selectionProspective cohort or cross-sectional studies assessing the effect of pregnancy on gingival inflammation evaluated by the gingival index and/or bleeding on probing were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS).Data extraction and synthesisStudy assessment and data extraction were carried out independently by two reviewers, with disputes resolved by a third reviewer. Mean values of primary and secondary outcomes were directly pooled and analysed with weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), considering independently each study design (cohort and cross-sectional). Study specific estimates were pooled with both the fixed- and random-effect models.ResultsForty-four articles representing 33 studies (14 cohort and 19 cross-sectional) were included. Meta-analyses revealed a significantly lower GI in pregnant women in the first term compared with those in their second or third term of pregnancy; a lower mean GI score in post-partum women compared with women in their second [WMD = 0.143; 95% CI (0.031; 0.255); p = 0.012] or third term [WMD = 0.256; 95% CI (0.151; 0.360); p < 0.001] of pregnancy, when considering cohort studies; non-pregnant women had lower mean GI values than women in their second or third term of pregnancy. Small changes in plaque levels were reported.ConclusionsThe results of this systematic review confirm that gingival inflammation is significantly increased throughout pregnancy and when comparing pregnant versus post-partum or non-pregnant women, without a concomitant increase in plaque levels. However, this information should be considered with caution, due to the small number of studies included in the meta-analyses, the low quality of the included studies, differences in study design, absence of a periodontal diagnosis at baseline and performance of periodontal treatment in some cases. No conclusions could be drawn regarding secondary outcomes such as microbiological, immunological and patient-centred data, because no meta-analyses were possible for these factors. Future studies with higher quality should be designed to answer these questions.

BACKGROUND: Multiple guidelines and systematic reviews recommend sealant use to reduce caries risk. Yet, multiple reports also indicate that sealants are significantly underutilized. This study examined the knowledge, opinions, values, and practice (KOVP) of dentists concerning sealant use in the southwest region of Andalusia, Spain. This is a prelude to the generation of a regional plan for improving children's oral health in Andalusia. METHODS: The survey's target population was dentists working in western Andalusia, equally distributed in the provinces of Seville, Cadiz, and Huelva (N=2,047). A convenience sample of meeting participants and meeting participant email lists (N=400) were solicited from the annual course on Community and Pediatric Dentistry. This course is required for all public health sector dentists, and is open to all private sector dentists. Information on the dentist's KOVP of sealants was collected using four-part questionnaire with 31, 5-point Likert-scaled questions. RESULTS: The survey population demographics included 190 men (48%) and 206 women (52%) with an average clinical experience of 10.6 (+/-8.4) years and 9.3 (+/-7.5) years, respectively. A significant sex difference was observed in the distribution of place of work (urban/suburb) (p=0.001), but no sex differences between working sector (public/private). The mean+/-SD values for each of the four KOVP sections for pit and fissure sealants were: knowledge=3.57+/-0.47; opinion=2.48+/-0.47; value=2.74+/-0.52; and practice=3.48+/-0.50. No sex differences were found in KOVP (all p>0.4). Independent of sex: knowledge statistically differed by years of experience and place of work; opinion statistically differed by years of experience and sector; and practice statistically differed by years of experience and sector. Less experienced dentists tended to have slightly higher scores (~0.25 on a Likert 1-5 scale). Statistically significant correlations were found between knowledge and practice (r=0.44, p=0.00) and between opinion and value (r=0.35, p=0.00). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that, similar to other countries, Andalusian dentists know that sealants are effective, have neutral to positive attitudes toward sealants; though, based on epidemiological studies, underuse sealants. Therefore, methods other than classical behavior change (eg: financial or legal mechanisms) will be required to change practice patterns aimed at improving children's oral health.