Faculty Bibliography

From Celsus' first reports of rubor, calor, dolor, tumor, and functio laesa, has come an understanding of inflammation's manifestations at the organ, tissue, vascular, cellular, genetic, and molecular levels. Molecular medicine now raises the opposite question: can local oral infections and their inflammatory mediators increase systemic morbidity or mortality? From these perspectives we examine the clinical evidence relating caries, periodontal disease, and pericoronitis to systemic disease. Widespread affirmation of an oral-systemic linkage remains elusive, raising sobering cautions.

BACKGROUND: Teaching the steps of evidence-based practice (EBP) has become standard curriculum for health professions at both student and professional levels. Determining the best methods for evaluating EBP learning is hampered by a dearth of valid and practical assessment tools and by the absence of guidelines for classifying the purpose of those that exist. Conceived and developed by delegates of the Fifth International Conference of Evidence-Based Health Care Teachers and Developers, the aim of this statement is to provide guidance for purposeful classification and development of tools to assess EBP learning. DISCUSSION: This paper identifies key principles for designing EBP learning assessment tools, recommends a common taxonomy for new and existing tools, and presents the Classification Rubric for EBP Assessment Tools in Education (CREATE) framework for classifying such tools. Recommendations are provided for developers of EBP learning assessments and priorities are suggested for the types of assessments that are needed. Examples place existing EBP assessments into the CREATE framework to demonstrate how a common taxonomy might facilitate purposeful development and use of EBP learning assessment tools. SUMMARY: The widespread adoption of EBP into professional education requires valid and reliable measures of learning. Limited tools exist with established psychometrics. This international consensus statement strives to provide direction for developers of new EBP learning assessment tools and a framework for classifying the purposes of such tools.

The IADR Global Oral Health Inequalities Task Group on Dental Caries has synthesized current evidence and opinion to identify a five-year implementation and research agenda which should lead to improvements in global oral health, with particular reference to the implementation of current best evidence as well as integrated action to reduce caries and health inequalities between and within countries. The Group determined that research should: integrate health and oral health wherever possible, using common risk factors; be able to respond to and influence international developments in health, healthcare, and health payment systems as well as dental prevention and materials; and exploit the potential for novel funding partnerships with industry and foundations. More effective communication between and among the basic science, clinical science, and health promotion/public health research communities is needed. Translation of research into policy and practice should be a priority for all. Both community and individual interventions need tailoring to achieve a more equal and person-centered preventive focus and reduce any social gradient in health. Recommendations are made for both clinical and public health implementation of existing research and for caries-related research agendas in clinical science, health promotion/public health, and basic science.

DATA SOURCES: Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), CINAHL, Science Direct, ISI Web of Science, and SCOPUS. The following journals were hand searched: Journal of Periodontology, International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Dental Research, Journal of Periodontal Research, Periodontology 2000, Journal of Dentistry, Journal of American Dental Associations, Journal of Clinical Dentistry, Lasers in Medical Science, Lasers in Surgery and Medicine, Clinical Oral Investigations, and Photomedicine and Laser Surgery as well as the reference lists of included articles. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing Er:YAG laser with manual or ultrasonic SRP alone were included. No language restrictions were applied. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were collected by two independent reviewers with only numeric data being extracted. Data were combined for meta-analysis with the effect size being estimated and reported as the mean difference (MD) for continuous variables using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the /2-based Q-statistic method and I(2) measurement. RESULTS: Five trials met the inclusion criteria. Five trials (85 patients and 3,564 sites) were entered in the meta-analysis to investigate clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, pocket depth (PD) reduction and gingival recession (GR). All studies reported significant intragroup improvement in clinical and microbiological parameters in patients treated with the Er:YAG laser. However, three studies did not report a significant difference between Er:YAG laser and SRP groups in CAL gain, PD reduction or GR changes. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences for any investigated parameters at six and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Significant heterogeneity, a high risk of bias in three of the five included studies, and methodological shortcomings indicate that the results should be considered with caution. Future long-term, well-designed RCTs are needed to assess the scientific evidence of Er:YAG laser efficacy as an alternative treatment strategy to SRP.

DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and hand searching of the journals; Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, Gerodontology, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Dental Research, Journal of Periodontology, Journal of Periodontal Research, Journal of Public Health Dentistry and Oral Diseases. Any potential studies in the reference lists of the identified articles read completely were also considered. STUDY SELECTION: Studies published in English investigating associations between smoking and tooth loss and reporting the effect size were included. Literature reviews and studies that combined former smokers with non-smokers or current smokers were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified independently by another with disagreements being resolved by discussion. Methodological quality of studies was assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). A qualitative summary is presented. RESULTS: Six cross-sectional and two cohort studies were included examining 58,755 subjects in four countries. All studies reported significant associations, although the strength of the association was usually moderate. Four studies reported dose-response relationships between exposure to smoking and the risk of developing tooth loss. A decrease in the risk of tooth loss for former smokers was evident in six studies. Interpretation of evidence for each element was consistent, despite some shortcomings regarding study type and population. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the consistent evidence found with the existing biological plausibility, a causal association between smoking and tooth loss is highly likely. Further studies using a cohort design and different populations are necessary to confirm this association.