Silver Diamine Fluoride Protocol for Reducing Preventable Dental Hospitalisations in Victorian Children

IntroductionThis study was designed to assess whether a dental caries management protocol combining a single application of 38% silver diamine fluoride (SDF) with comprehensive oral health education will successfully divert high-risk children from dental treatment under dental general anaesthesia (DGA), arrest active caries in primary teeth, and improve parent-reported child oral health–related quality of life (OHRQoL).MethodsChildren aged 2 to 10 years, who attended two public dental agencies in Victoria, Australia, and were unable to tolerate restorative treatments in the clinic setting, elected to participate in either a 38% SDF intervention protocol or, alternatively, referral for DGA. Follow-up examinations were completed at 6 months to assess caries progression, decayed missing filled tooth index, PUFA index (pulpal involvement, ulceration, fistula, abscess), DGA referral rates, and OHRQoL (Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale [ECOHIS]).ResultsOf the total sample, 89.5% of children (n = 102) [mean (SD) age, 4.1 (1.0) years] with 401 active carious lesions elected to participate in the 38% SDF protocol; 10.5% (n = 12) of parents opted for referral for treatment under DGA. The proportion of active caries subsequently arrested at follow-up (number of arrested lesions/number of lesions treated) was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.87). There was an 88% reduction in referrals for DGA in eligible children over the 6-month period. The 38% SDF intervention group showed a significant improvement in ECOHIS scores at follow-up (P < .001).DiscussionAdoption of the 38% SDF intervention protocol resulted in a significant reduction in the rate of preventable dental hospitalisations. Most parents opted against referral for DGA. Parent-reported OHRQoL for children improved significantly.     

Prosthetic treatment in the adult French population: Prevalence and relation with demographic,socioeconomic and medical characteristics

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of dental prosthetic treatment and to investigate the demographic, social, economic and medical factors associated with the use of fixed and removable dentures in a representative sample of adults living in France.MethodsThe data were obtained from the 2002–2003 Decennial Health Survey, a cross-sectional study of a representative sample of the population living in France, which included 29,679 adults. Information was collected by interview. The variables collected were fixed denture, removable denture, age, gender, number of children, area of residence, nationality, educational attainment, family social status, employment status, annual household income per capita, supplementary insurance, chronic disease, eyesight problems/glasses, hearing problems/hearing aids. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to study the relationship between prosthetic treatment and demographic, socioeconomic and medical characteristics unadjusted, adjusted for age and adjusted for all the characteristics.ResultsThe prevalence of prosthetic treatment was 34.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): [34.1; 35.2]) for fixed prosthetic dentures and 13.8% (95% CI: [13.4; 14.2]) for removable prosthetic dentures. We showed a gradient between educational attainment and removable dentures; the odds ratio adjusted for all the variables (aOR) associated with no or primary education compared to post-secondary education was 2.56; 95% CI: [2.09; 3.13]. When annual household income per capita was low, subjects were less likely to report fixed dentures (aOR = 0.68; 95% CI: [0.62; 0.75]) than those with high annual household income per capita. Individuals without insurance less often reported fixed dentures than those with private insurance. Those reporting chronic disease were less likely to report fixed dentures (aOR = 0.87; 95% CI: [0.79; 0.95]) but more likely to report removable dentures (aOR = 1.29; 95% CI: [1.17; 1.43]) than those without chronic disease.ConclusionThis study reveals social, economic and medical inequalities in fixed and removable prosthetic treatment among adults in France.     

Clinical safety of enamel matrix derivative (EMDOGAIN®) in the treatment of periodontal defects

Abstract The aim of the present clinical trial was to test tolerability during 2 treatments with EMDOGAIN® in a large number of patients. An open, controlled study design in 10 Swedish specialist clinics was chosen, with a test group of 107 patients treated with EMDOGAIN® in connection with periodontal surgery at 2 surgical test sites per patient. The procedures were performed 2 to 6 weeks apart on one-rooted teeth with at least 4 mm deep intraosseous lesions. A control group of 33 patients underwent flap surgery without EMDOGAIN® at I comparable site. In total 214 test and 33 control surgeries were performed. Serum samples were obtained from test patients for analysis of total and specific antibody levels. 10 of the patients had samples taken before and after the first surgery. 56 other samples were taken after one treatment with EMDOGAIN®, and 63 after 2 treatments. None of the samples, not even from allergy-prone patients after 2 treatments, indicated deviations from established baseline ranges. This indicates that the immunogenic potential of EMDOGAIN® is extremely low when applied in conjunction with periodontal surgery. Comparison between the test and control groups demonstrated the same type and frequency of post-surgical experiences, i.e., reactions caused by the surgical procedure itself. Clinical probing and radiographic evaluation was performed at baseline and 8 months postsurgery. About half of the patients (44 test and 21 control) were also evaluated after 3 years. There was a significant difference between the test and control results at 8 months post surgery. and this difference had increased further at the 3 year follow-up. The 2.5–3 mm increase in attachment and bone level after treatment with EMDOGAIN® was of the same magnitude as seen in the studies with split-mouth design aiming for lest of effectiveness of EMDOGAIN®.