ABSTRACT
Objetivo: Avaliar a aceitabilidade e o conhecimento de estudantes de graduação em Odontologia e cirurgiões-dentistas sobre a remoção seletiva de tecido cariado (RSTC). Materiais e Métodos: Participaram do estudo graduandos do terceiro e quarto ano de Odontologia (Grupo 1) e egressos de um Centro Hospitalar de Odontologia (Grupo 2). Os participantes responderam de forma anônima e confidencial um questionário validado contendo onze questões sobre diagnóstico e manejo de lesões cariosas profundas. Teste qui-quadrado de Pearson e regressão logística multivariada foram aplicados (p<0.05). Resultados: A amostra total foi composta por 146 participantes. Destes, 81.5% eram do sexo feminino; 52.05% eram graduados e a faixa etária mais prevalente foi de 18 a 29 anos (85.62%). Sessenta e nove participantes escolheram o tratamento expectante (p=0.027). A análise de regressão logística mostrou diferenças estatisticamente significativas. Os participantes que consideraram a parede pulpar úmida têm aproximadamente oito vezes mais chances de escolha pelo tratamento invasivo (p=0.028). Aqueles que escolheram o tratamento endodôntico como opção de sobrevida em dois anos têm três vezes mais chances de optar pelo tratamento invasivo (p=0.032). Aqueles que afirmaram que a dentina cariada próxima à polpa não deveria ser removida tiveram quase três vezes mais chances de optar por tratamentos minimamente invasivos (p=0.031). Discussão: Estudos com questionários podem ser ferramentas úteis para detectar se estudantes e cirurgiões-dentistas estão seguindo as evidências mais atuais para o tratamento de lesões cariosas profundas. Conclusão: Os participantes tinham certo nível de conhecimento sobre RSTC, mas a aceitabilidade da técnica carecia de consenso.
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptability and knowledge of undergraduate dental students and dentists on selective caries tissue removal (SCTR). Materials and Methods: Third- and fourth-year Dentistry undergraduates (Group 1) and graduates working in a Hospital Dentistry Center (Group 2) were included in the study. Participants anonymously and confidentially answered a validated questionnaire containing eleven questions on the diagnosis and management of deep caries lesions. Pearson's Chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression compared the answers (p<0.05). Results: Total sample comprised 146 participants. Of these, 81.5% were female; 52.05% were graduates and the most prevalent age group was 18-29 years old (85.62%). Sixty-nine participants chose stepwise caries removal (p=0.027). The logistic regression analysis showed statistically significant differences. The participants who considered pulp wall moist have approximately eight times more likelihood to choose an invasive treatment (p=0.028). Those who chose endodontic treatment as an option for two-year survival have three times more likelihood to choose an invasive treatment (p=0.032). Those who affirmed that the carious dentin close to the pulp should not be removed had almost three times more likelihood to choose minimally invasive treatments (p=0.031). Discussion: Studies with questionnaires can be useful tools to detect whether the students and dentists are following the most current evidences to treat deep carious lesions. Conclusion: The participants had certain level of knowledge on SCTR, but the technique acceptability lacked consensus.
ABSTRACT
Abstract The Internet is a growing source of knowledge and can provide information about oral health. This ecological study aimed to characterize the interests in toothpaste among Google users from different countries. Our hypothesis was that there would be an increase in Google users' interest in information about toothpaste. This retrospective longitudinal ecological study analyzed the toothpaste-related interest of Google users from 10 countries between January 2004 and December 2020. The monthly variation in relative search volume (RSV) and the main related queries were determined using Google Trends. Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) forecasting models were built to establish the predictive RSV values for toothpaste for an additional 12 months. Autocorrelation plots and the generalized additive model (GAM) were used to diagnose trends and seasonality in RSV curves. Additionally, the influence of social isolation related to the outbreak of COVID-19 was analyzed. Although not detected by autocorrelation function (ACF) and partial autocorrelation function (PACF) analyses, the heuristic analysis showed an increase in the interest in toothpaste-related information in all countries, with a stable trend observed in the 12-month forecasts, except for the increases in the United Kingdom and South Africa. Also, GAM analyses demonstrated a non-significant monthly or quarterly seasonal influence on data. In addition, social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic did not influence the online information-seeking behavior of Google Search users linked to this topic. We confirmed the hypothesis that the interest of Google Search users in information about toothpaste increased in all of the 10 assessed countries.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Considering the unfavorable implications of health falsehoods and the lack of dental research into information disorder, this study aimed to identify and characterize online oral health misinformation. A total of 410 websites published in English were retrieved using Google Advanced Search and screened by two independent investigators to compile falsehoods through thematic content analysis. Afterward, 318 pieces of misinformation were consensually divided into four groups concerning their informational interest (G1), financial, psychological, and social interests produced/disseminated by non-dental professionals (G2) or by dental professionals (G3), and political interests (G4). Social media (Facebook and Instagram) and fact-checking tool (Snopes) were also screened to determine the spread of falsehoods by identifying corresponding posts and warnings. As a result, misinformation was mainly associated with gum diseases (12.0%), root canal treatment (11.6%), toothache (10.4%), fluoride (10.4%), and dental caries (9.8%), with a special highlight on recommendations for the usage of natural products, toxicity concerns, and anti-fluoridation propaganda. Additionally, most misinformation was allocated in G3 (41.9%), which presented a statistically higher frequency of financial interests than G4. Finally, falsehoods were considerably identified on Facebook (62.9%) and Instagram (49.4%), especially G3 and G4. Nevertheless, Snopes has debunked only 5.9% of these content items. Therefore, misinformation was predominantly produced or disseminated by dental professionals mainly motivated by financial interests and usually linked to alternative/natural treatments. Although these items were shared on social media, fact-checking agencies seemed to have limited knowledge about their dissemination.
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Maintenance of oral microbiota balance is the simplest way to prevent infectious oral diseases, through controlling dental biofilm. Combined use of mouthwash and mechanical removal has been shown to be a very effective way for this. OBJECTIVES: To identify clinical studies comparing the antimicrobial effect and possible adverse effects and/or side effects of chlorhexidine-based mouthwashes with those of mouthwashes containing chlorine dioxide and/or polyhexanide, for controlling oral microbiota. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review designed by the stomatology sector of postgraduation in applied dental sciences of Bauru Dentistry School, University of São Paulo, Brazil. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using online databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Science Direct) up to April 8, 2020. The search was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: The studies included comprised eight articles published between 2001 and 2017. A total of 295 young adults, adults and elderly people were evaluated (males 44.75% and females 55.25%). Three articles compared polyhexanide with chlorhexidine and five articles compared chlorine dioxide with chlorhexidine. No studies comparing all three mouthwashes were found. The concentrations of the study solutions were quite varied, and all rinses had an antimicrobial effect. In four studies, it was stated that no side effects or adverse effects had been found. Three studies did not address these results and only one study addressed side effects and/or adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Mouthwashes containing chlorine dioxide and polyhexanide are viable alternatives to chlorhexidine, since they reduce oral biofilm and have little or no reported side or adverse effects.