A survey of drug prescribing practices of dentists

A survey of drug prescribing habits of 357 dentists practicing in five counties in Western New York was conducted in 1986. Respondents represented both general practitioners and specialists who were graduates of 25 different dental schools. From this study it can be concluded that dentists prescribe a wide range of drugs representing over 13 drug categories. The most frequently prescribed drug categories were antibiotics, narcotic analgesics, non-steroidal inflammatory agents, non-narcotic analgesics, and fluorides. The most frequent prescribers of drugs were oral surgeons, endodontists and periodontists.     

A survey of dentists' drug prescribing practices

The drug prescribing practices of dentists should be of interest to the dental profession, drug manufacturers, the medical profession and dental educators. This article presents an update on an earlier similar survey reported by the authors as well as information on current infection control procedures, the treatment of hepatitis and AIDS patients, and generic drug substitution. The classes of drugs that are important to the practitioner and the level of prescribing activity have not changed appreciably since the earlier study. There has been, however, a significant change in nonopioid analgesic drug preference with ibuprofen overtaking aspirin and acetaminophen by a wide margin. That age affects the character of practice was confirmed: far fewer older practitioners report prescribing drugs than do their younger counterparts. A very gratifying finding was the high level of compliance with ADA recommendations regarding infectious diseases although fears over treating AIDS patients remain high.     

Barriers to and facilitators of opioid prescribing by dentists in the United States: A qualitative study

BackgroundDentists in the United States frequently prescribe opioids for dental-related pain, although evidence shows superior efficacy of nonopioids for pain management. A national sample of US dentists was interviewed to understand the barriers and facilitators to opioid prescribing.MethodsSemistructured one-on-one telephone interviews were conducted with dentists sampled from the 6 regions of The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. Responses were coded into the domains of the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation Model of Behavior. Potential behavior change interventions were identified for targeted themes.ResultsSeventy-three interviews were qualitatively analyzed. Most of those interviewed were general dentists (86.3%) and on average (SD) were in practice for 24.3 (13.0) years. Ten themes were identified within the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation Model of Behavior. Dentists’ knowledge of opioid risk, ability to identify substance use disorder behavior, and capability of communicating pain management plans to patients or following clinic policies or state and federal regulations were linked with judicious opioid prescribing. Dentists reported prescribing opioids if they determined clinical necessity or feared negative consequences for refusing to prescribe opioids.ConclusionsDentists’ opioid decision making is influenced by a range of real-world practice experiences and patient and clinic factors. Education and training that target dentists’ knowledge gaps and changes in dentists’ practice environment can encourage effective communication of pain management strategies with patients and prescribing of nonopioids as first-line analgesics while conserving opioid use.Practical ImplicationsIdentified knowledge gaps in dentistry can be targets for education, clinical guidelines, and policy interventions to ensure safe and appropriate prescribing of opioids.     

Antibiotic use for treating dental infections in children: a survey of dentists' prescribing practices

BackgroundThe authors conducted a study to examine the antibiotic prescribing practices of general and pediatric dentists in the management of odontogenic infections in children.MethodsThe authors relied on a cross-sectional study design to assess the antibiotic prescribing practices of general and pediatric dentists in North Carolina. The survey instrument consisted of five clinical case scenarios that included antibiotic-prescribing decisions in a self-administered questionnaire format. The participants were volunteers attending one of four continuing education courses. The authors invited all pediatric dentists in private practice to participate in the study, as well as general practitioners who treated children in general practice. The authors compared the practitioners&;apos; responses for each clinical case scenario with the prescribing guidelines of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry and the American Dental Association.ResultsA total of 154 surveys were completed and returned (55 percent response rate). The mean age of respondents was 47 years, and the mean number of years in practice was 19. Of the 154 overall, 106 (69 percent) were general practitioners and 48 (31 percent) were pediatric dentists. Across the three in-office clinical case scenarios, adherence to professional prescribing guidelines ranged from 10 to 42 percent. For the two weekend scenarios, overall adherence to the professional prescribing guidelines dropped to 14 and 17 percent. Dentists who had completed postgraduate education (n = 73 [51 percent]) were more likely (P < .05) to have adhered to published guidelines in prescribing antibiotics.ConclusionsThe results of this survey show that dentists&;apos; adherence to professional guidelines for prescribing antibiotics for odontogenic infections in children was low. There appears to be a lack of concordance between recommended professional guidelines and the antibiotic prescribing practices of dentists. Clearer, more specific guidelines may lead to improved adherence among dentists.     

A Cochrane systematic review finds no evidence to support the use of antibiotics for pain relief in irreversible pulpitis

The Cochrane Systematic Review promotes evidence-based outcomes studies. The review summarized here was conducted in an attempt to achieve reliable evidence concerning the effectiveness, or otherwise, of prescribing antibiotics for patients having irreversible pulpitis. A competent search strategy was developed and used across several databases including MEDLINE to identify randomized controlled trials for inclusion. Assessment of methodological quality was based on criteria defined by The Cochrane Collaboration. Clinical outcome, expressed in terms of pain relief, was examined. There was a relative dearth of research providing a high level of evidence. Only one methodologically sound trial was found that compared pain relief with systemic antibiotic/analgesic treatment against a placebo/analgesic combination during the acute preoperative phase of irreversible pulpitis. Although the selected study used a relatively small, low-powered sample, it did provide some evidence that there is no significant difference in pain relief for patients with untreated irreversible pulpitis who received antibiotics versus those who did not. These findings increase the rationale to investigate the teaching of safe and effective antibiotic prescribing in endodontics and to advance the development of appropriate evidence-based clinical guidelines.     

Combining ibuprofen and acetaminophen for acute pain management after third-molar extractions: Translating clinical research to dental practice

BackgroundEffective and safe drug therapy for the management of acute postoperative pain has relied on orally administered analgesics such as ibuprofen, naproxen and acetaminophen, or N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP), as well as combination formulations containing opioids such as hydrocodone with APAP. The combination of ibuprofen and APAP has been advocated in the last few years as an alternative therapy for postoperative pain management. The authors conducted a critical analysis to evaluate the scientific evidence for using the ibuprofen-APAP combination and propose clinical treatment recommendations for its use in managing acute postoperative pain in dentistry.Types of Studies ReviewedThe authors used quantitative evidence-based reviews published by the Cochrane Collaboration to determine the relative analgesic efficacy and safety of combining ibuprofen and APAP. They found additional articles by searching the Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed and http://ClinicalTrials.gov databases.ConclusionsThe results of the quantitative systematic reviews indicated that the ibuprofen-APAP combination may be a more effective analgesic, with fewer untoward effects, than are many of the currently available opioid-containing formulations. In addition, the authors found several randomized controlled trials that also indicated that the ibuprofen-APAP combination provided greater pain relief than did ibuprofen or APAP alone after third-molar extractions. The adverse effects associated with the combination were similar to those of the individual component drugs.Practical ImplicationsCombining ibuprofen with APAP provides dentists with an additional therapeutic strategy for managing acute postoperative dental pain. This combination has been reported to provide greater analgesia without significantly increasing the adverse effects that often are associated with opioid-containing analgesic combinations. When making stepwise recommendations for the management of acute postoperative dental pain, dentists should consider including ibuprofen-APAP combination therapy.     

Current concepts in acute pain management

Analgesics most commonly prescribed in dentistry for acute pain relief include the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, acetaminophen, and various opioid-containing analgesic combinations. The NSAIDs and presumably acetaminophen act by inhibiting cyclooxgenase enzymes responsible for the formation of prostaglandins that promote pain and inflammation. Opioids such as codeine, hydrocodone, and oxycodone stimulate endogenous opioid receptors to bring about analgesic and other effects. Numerous clinical studies have confirmed that moderate to severe pain of dental origin is best managed through the use of ibuprofen or another NSAID whose maximum analgesic effect is at least equal to that of standard doses of acetaminophen-opioid combinations. If an NSAID cannot be prescribed because of patient intolerance, analgesic preparations that combine effective doses of an orally active opioid with 600 to 1,000 mg of acetaminophen are preferred in the healthy adult. On occasion, prescribing both an NSAID and an acetaminophen-opioid combination may be helpful in patients not responding to a single product. In all cases, however, the primary analgesic should be taken on a fixed schedule, not on a "prn" (or as needed) basis, which only guarantees the patient will experience pain.