Faculty Bibliography

Dental teams and their workplaces are among the most exposed to airborne and bloodborne infectious agents, and therefore at the forefront of pandemic-related changes to how dental care is organized and provided to patients. The increasing complexity of guidelines makes is challenging for clinicians to navigate the multitude of COVID-19 guidelines issued by different agencies. A comparative analysis of guidance issued for managing COVID-19 in dental settings leading U.S. agencies was conducted, including documents of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), an agency of the U.S. Secretary of Labor, and of the U.S. Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), an agency of the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services. Details of infection control and other risk mitigation measures were reviewed for consistency, overlaps and similarities, then clustered according to thematic areas covering all domains of managing a dental healthcare setting. The analysis revealed five distinct areas of pandemic control, comprising (1) planning and protocols, (2) patient screening, (3) preparation of facilities, (4) PPE and infection control, and (5) procedures and aerosol control; thereby covering systematically all aspects requiring adaptation in a pandemic context. The "Pandemic-5 Framework for COVID-19 Control in Dentistry" provides an opportunity to simplify comprehensive decision-making from a clinical practitioner perspective. The framework supports a comprehensive systems-driven approach by using dental clinics as a setting to integrate pandemic clinical responses with the implementation of appropriate infection control protocols. Traditionally these two aspects are addressed independently from each other in separate concepts.

Credible, reliable and consistent information to the public, as well as health professionals and decision makers, is crucial to help navigate uncertainty and risk in times of crisis and concern. Traditionally, information and health communications issued by respected and established government agencies have been regarded as factual, unbiased and credible. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is such an agency that addresses all aspects of health and public health on behalf of the U.S Government for the benefit of its citizens. In July 2020, the CDC issued guidelines on reopening schools which resulted in open criticism by the U.S. President and others, prompting a review and publication of revised guidelines together with a special "Statement on the Importance of Reopening Schools under COVID-19." We hypothesize that this statement introduced bias with the intention to shift the public perception and media narrative in favor of reopening of schools. Using a mixed methods approach, including an online text analysis tool, we demonstrate that document title and structure, word frequencies, word choice, and website presentation did not provide a balanced account of the complexity and uncertainty surrounding school reopening during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite available scientific guidance and practical evidence-based advice on how to manage infection risks when reopening schools, the CDC Statement was intentionally overriding possible parent and public health concerns. The CDC Statement provides an example of how political influence is exercised over the presentation of science in the context of a major pandemic. It was withdrawn by the CDC in November 2020.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic revealed a lack of consensus on the concept of essential oral health care. We propose a definition of essential oral health care that includes urgent and basic oral health care to initiate a broader debate and stakeholder alignment. We argue that oral health care must be part of essential health care provided by any health system. Essential oral health care covers the most prevalent oral health problems through an agreed-on set of safe, quality, and cost-effective interventions at the individual and community level to promote and protect oral health, as well as prevent and treat common oral diseases, including appropriate rehabilitative services, thereby maintaining health, productivity, and quality of life. By default, essential oral health care does not include the full spectrum of possible interventions that contemporary dentistry can provide. On the basis of this definition, we conceptualize a layered model of essential oral health care that integrates urgent and basic oral health care, as well as advanced/specialist oral health care. Finally, we present 3 key reflections on the essentiality of oral health care. First, oral health care must be an integral component of a health care system's essential services, and by implication, oral health care personnel are part of the essential health care workforce. Second, not all dental care is essential oral health care, and not all essential care is also urgent, particularly under the specific risk conditions of the pandemic. Third, there is a need for criteria, evidence, and consensus-building processes to define which dental interventions are to be included in which category of essential oral health care. All stakeholders, including the research, academic, and clinical communities, as well as professional organizations and civil society, need to tackle this aspect in a concerted effort. Such consensus will be crucial for dentistry in view of the Sustainable Development Goal's push for universal health coverage, which must cover essential oral health care.

Oral cavity cancer has a low 5-y survival rate, but outcomes improve when the disease is detected early. Cytology is a less invasive method to assess oral potentially malignant disorders relative to the gold-standard scalpel biopsy and histopathology. In this report, we aimed to determine the utility of cytological signatures, including nuclear F-actin cell phenotypes, for classifying the entire spectrum of oral epithelial dysplasia and oral squamous cell carcinoma. We enrolled subjects with oral potentially malignant disorders, subjects with previously diagnosed malignant lesions, and healthy volunteers without lesions and obtained brush cytology specimens and matched scalpel biopsies from 486 subjects. Histopathological assessment of the scalpel biopsy specimens classified lesions into 6 categories. Brush cytology specimens were analyzed by machine learning classifiers trained to identify relevant cytological features. Multimodal diagnostic models were developed using cytology results, lesion characteristics, and risk factors. Squamous cells with nuclear F-actin staining were associated with early disease (i.e., lower proportions in benign lesions than in more severe lesions), whereas small round parabasal-like cells and leukocytes were associated with late disease (i.e., higher proportions in severe dysplasia and carcinoma than in less severe lesions). Lesions with the impression of oral lichen planus were unlikely to be either dysplastic or malignant. Cytological features substantially improved upon lesion appearance and risk factors in predicting squamous cell carcinoma. Diagnostic models accurately discriminated early and late disease with AUCs (95% CI) of 0.82 (0.77 to 0.87) and 0.93 (0.88 to 0.97), respectively. The cytological features identified here have the potential to improve screening and surveillance of the entire spectrum of oral potentially malignant disorders in multiple care settings.

Approximately 47 million people worldwide have been diagnosed with dementia, 60%-80% of whom have dementia of the Alzheimer's disease type. Unfortunately, there is no cure in sight. Defining modifiable risk factors for Alzheimer's disease may have a significant impact on its prevalence. An increasing body of evidence suggests that chronic inflammation and microbial dysbiosis are risk factors for Alzheimer's disease. Periodontal disease is a chronic inflammatory disease that develops in response to response to microbial dysbiosis. Many studies have shown an association between periodontal disease and Alzheimer's disease. The intent of this paper was to review the existing literature and determine, using the Bradford Hill criteria, whether periodontal disease is causally related to Alzheimer's disease.

OBJECTIVE:Dental caries (tooth decay) is the most prevalent childhood disease in the world. A school-based program for the prevention of dental caries providing bi-annual sealants, interim therapeutic restorations, and fluoride varnish to children aged 5-12 years was previously associated with a significant reduction in the prevalence of untreated tooth decay over time. The objective of this study was to explore potential nonlinear change in the risk of untreated decay in children receiving caries prevention. RESULTS:Across all study participants, there was a significant increase in the odds of untreated tooth decay over time (OR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.51, 2.39), but the rate of this risk rapidly decreased with each observational visit (OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.93, 0.91). Overall effects substantially depended on the oral health status of participants at baseline: for children with untreated decay at their first observation, the odds of untreated decay over time was 0.39 (95% CI 0.27, 0.55). A quadratic change for this subpopulation showed that the per-visit decrease in decay was attenuated with each subsequent observation (OR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.04, 1.20).

Dental services are significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Almost all dental procedures carry a high infection risk for providers and patients due to the spread of aerosols. As a consequence, public health agencies and professional associations have issued guidelines for enhanced infection control and personal protection equipment and have also limited care to urgent or emergency services. However, there is no dental service concept for pandemic disaster preparedness or response that might be applied. Moreover, pathways to dental care provision in a post-pandemic future with persisting risks are needed. We propose Safer Aerosol-Free Emergent Dentistry (SAFER Dentistry) as one approach to dental services during and emerging from the pandemic. The concept's starting point is the identification of the most common patient needs. The next step is to replace common treatments addressing the most frequent needs with alternative interventions involving a lower infection risk because they do not generate aerosols. SAFER Dentistry is innovative, avoids risk, and responds to the requirements of a pandemic and post-pandemic emergency where the risk of airborne disease transmission remains high. SAFER Dentistry thereby ensures continuity of dental services while protecting providers and patients from infectious pathogens. Moreover, SAFER Dentistry allows dental service providers to remain operational and generate income even under pandemic conditions. Potential implementation and policy options for SAFER Dentistry include universal availability without co-payments by patients and a uniform bundled payment scheme for providers to simplify budgeting, reimbursement, and administration during a pandemic. Adaptations and adjustments of the concept are possible and encouraged as long as the principle of avoiding aerosol-generating procedures is maintained.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Children's oral health-related quality of life (COHQoL) measures are well known and widely used. However, rigorous systematic reviews of these measures and analyses of their quality are in absence. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:To systematically review and quantitatively assess the quality of COHQoL measures through a scoping review. DATA SOURCES/UNASSIGNED:Systematic literature search of PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), HaPI (Health and Psychosocial Instruments), and DOSS (Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source). STUDY ELIGIBILITY/UNASSIGNED:The measure's focus was COHQoL; the child age ranged from 5 to 14 years; the publication was either a research article or a systematic review and related to caries; and it was written in English or had an English abstract. Two authors independently selected the studies. Disagreements were reconciled by group discussions with a third author. APPRAISAL/UNASSIGNED:The International Society for Quality of Life Research minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures were used for quality appraisal. SYNTHESIS/UNASSIGNED:Descriptive analysis. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:We identified 18 measures. Their quality scores ranged from 9.5 to 15.0 on a scale of 16. The quality appeared to bear no relationship to the citation and use of these measures. However, elements of these measures might be more useful than others, depending on the age-specific use and primary quality concerns. LIMITATIONS/UNASSIGNED:Some of the information on the minimum standards of the 18 measures cannot be found in the existing literature. Measures published without English abstract were not searched. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:The quality of these measures is suboptimal. Researchers and practitioners in this field should exercise caution when choosing and using these measures. Efforts at improving the quality of the COHQoL measures, such as refining existing ones or developing new measures, are warranted. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT/UNASSIGNED:Researchers, clinician scientists, and clinicians can use the results of this study when deciding which oral health-related quality of life measure they wish to use in children.