Irreversible pulpitis - a source of antibiotic over-prescription?

Abstract Antibiotic resistance is a growing public health concern. Antibiotics continue to be prescribed by some clinicians to resolve dental pain even though research indicates that antibiotics are not effective for treating conditions such as irreversible pulpitis. The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which current research and evidence around irreversible pulpitis has been translated into dental practice and the gaps in dentists' knowledge. An on-line clinical vignette format survey questionnaire about treatment of irreversible pulpitis was distributed to the members of the Academy of Operative Dentistry and Academy of General Dentistry (US based international dental bodies). Their responses were recorded and evaluated. A total of 403 dentists participated in the survey. Over a third (39.3%) indicated they would prescribe antibiotics for symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in a permanent tooth occurring without any signs of systemic infection. The rest indicated they would not prescribe antibiotics; most of them would prescribe an analgesic combined with pulpectomy. Those who had undertaken advanced education training achieved a significantly higher mean knowledge score compared to those with just a primary dental degree (p=0.011). Similarly, full or part time academicians had a higher mean knowledge score than the clinicians who work only in private practice (p=0.014). Some dentists continue to prescribe antibiotics inappropriately for alleviating pain due to irreversible pulpitis. Antibiotic prescribing practices of dentists with advanced education or academic engagement were better as compared to the other participants. There is clear evidence of antibiotic over-prescribing for irreversible pulpitis which needs to be addressed urgently.

Resumo A resistência aos antibióticos é uma preocupação crescente para a saúde pública. Os antibióticos continuam a ser prescritos por alguns dentistas para resolver a dor dentária, embora pesquisas indiquem que os antibióticos não são eficazes no tratamento de condições como a pulpite irreversível. O objetivo deste estudo foi determinar em que medida as pesquisas atuais e as evidências em torno da pulpite irreversível foram traduzidas em prática odontológica e as lacunas existentes no conhecimento dos dentistas. Um questionário de pesquisa em formato de vinheta clínica on-line sobre o tratamento da pulpite irreversível foi distribuído para os membros da Academia de Odontologia Operatória e da Academia de Odontologia Geral (órgãos dentários internacionais dos EUA). Suas respostas foram registradas e avaliadas. Um total de 403 dentistas participou da pesquisa. Mais de um terço (39,3%) indicaram que prescreveriam antibióticos para pulpite irreversível sintomática em um dente permanente sem qualquer sinal de infecção sistêmica. O restante respondeu que eles não prescreveriam antibióticos; a maioria deles prescreveria um analgésico combinado com pulpectomia. Aqueles que realizaram o treinamento de educação avançada obtiveram uma pontuação de conhecimento médio significativamente maior em comparação com aqueles com apenas um grau primário de conhecimento odontológico (p=0,011). Da mesma forma, acadêmicos em tempo integral ou parcial tiveram uma pontuação média de conhecimento maior do que os clínicos que trabalham apenas em consultório particular (p=0,014). Alguns dentistas continuam a prescrever antibióticos inadequadamente para aliviar a dor decorrente de pulpite irreversível. Práticas de prescrição de antibióticos por dentistas com educação avançada ou envolvimento acadêmico foram melhores em comparação com os outros participantes. Há evidências claras de excesso de prescrição de antibiótico para pulpite irreversível que precisa ser tratada com urgência.

I've got toothache, i need antibiotics: a uk perspective on rational antibiotic prescribing by dentists

Abstract Antibiotics do not cure toothache. This headline message of the United Kingdom's (UK) Dental Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) toolkit's posters and leaflets is aimed at patients; clinicians are expected to know this already. Evidence based clinical guidelines exist to set clear standards for good clinical practice yet there are barriers to compliance. The national AMS audit tool is designed for clinicians to review their management of acute dental conditions, including but not limited to the prescription of antibiotics. In this article we aim to help dental teams protect their patients and themselves from adverse events related to antibiotic prescription. It explores the emergent problem of Clostridium difficile, antibiotic resistance and severe sepsis, and considers some of the barriers, which clinicians have suggested, contribute to the unjustified prescription of antibiotics. Dentists must weigh the risks against the benefits before prescribing any antibiotic.

Resumo Antibióticos não curam dor de dente. Tal mensagem, encontrada no título dos panfletos e cartazes da caixa de ferramentas Gerenciamento Antimicrobiano Odontológico (AMS) do Reino Unido, é direcionada aos pacientes; os clínicos já deveriam saber disso. Diretrizes clínicas baseadas em evidência existem para estabelecer padrões claros à boa prática clínica, ainda que existam barreiras para sua observância. A ferramenta AMS para monitoramento nacional é voltada para clínicos revisarem sua conduta frente às condições dentais agudas, inclusive mas não limitada à prescrição de antibióticos. Neste artigo, visa-se colaborar com equipes odontológicas a fim de protegerem a si e a seus pacientes contra situações adversas relacionadas ao uso de antibióticos. Explora-se o problema emergente do Clostridium difficile, resistência bacteriana a antimicrobianos e sepsis severa, além de considerar algumas das barreiras que clínicos têm sugerido como geradoras de prescrições inapropriadas de antibióticos. Os dentistas devem pesar riscos e benefícios antes de prescrever qualquer antibiótico.

A Comparison of the Bleaching Effectiveness of Chlorine Dioxide and Hydrogen Peroxide on Dental Composite

This study was carried out to verify if composites could be bleached using chlorine dioxide as compared with hydrogen peroxide. 3M ESPE Filtek Z350 Universal Restorative discs were prepared (n=40), with dimensions 5 mm diameter x 2 mm thickness. The discs were divided into 4 groups of 10 discs each. Color assessment was performed by CIEDE2000. The discs were stained with coffee, tea, wine and distilled water (control) solutions for 14 days, 5 hours daily. Color assessment was repeated on stained discs and followed by bleaching of 5 discs from each group using chlorine dioxide and hydrogen peroxide in-office systems. Finally, a last color assessment was performed and compared statistically. DE2000 after bleaching was very close to baseline for both the bleaching agents, although chlorine dioxide showed better results than hydrogen peroxide. After staining, there was a clinically significant discoloration (∆E2000≥3.43) for the tea, coffee and wine groups, and discoloration (∆E2000) was seen more in the wine group as compared to tea and coffee. Overall, the control group (distilled water) had the least color change in the three intervals. After bleaching, the color in all specimens returned close to the baseline. The color differences between bleaching and baseline were less than 3.43 for all groups. The obtained results show that chlorine dioxide is slightly superior to hydrogen peroxide in the bleaching of composites, while maintaining the shade of the composite close to the baseline.

Este estudo foi realizado para verificar se resinas compostas podem ser clareadas com uso do dióxido de cloro, em comparação com peróxido de hidrogênio. Foram preparados discos com resina restauradora Filtek Z350 3M ESPE (n=40), com dimensões 5 mm de diâmetro × 2 mm de espessura. Os discos foram divididos em 4 grupos de 10 discos cada. A avaliação da cor foi realizada por meio do CIEDE2000. Os discos foram manchados com soluções de café, chá, vinho e água destilada (controle) por 5 h diárias durante 14 dias. A avaliação da cor foi repetida nos discos manchados e seguida por clareamento de 5 discos de cada grupo, utilizando dióxido de cloro ou peróxido de hidrogênio pela técnica de consultório. Finalmente, uma última avaliação da cor foi realizada e as técnicas comparadas estatisticamente. DE2000 após o clareamento foi muito próxima ao baseline, para ambos os agentes clareadores, embora o dióxido de cloro tenha mostrado melhores resultados do que o peróxido de hidrogênio. Após o manchamento, houve uma descoloração clinicamente significativa (ΔE2000≥3,43) para os grupos de chá, café e vinho, sendo que o clareamento (ΔE2000) foi melhor obtido com o grupo do vinho, em comparação com chá e café. No geral, o grupo controle (água destilada) teve a menor mudança de cor nos três intervalos. Após o clareamento, a cor em todos os espécimes voltou próxima ao baseline. As diferenças de cor entre o clareamento e o baseline foram inferiores a 3,43 para todos os grupos. Os resultados indicam que o dióxido de cloro é ligeiramente superior ao peróxido de hidrogênio no clareamento de resinas compostas, mantendo a cor próxima à escala do baseline.

Antiemetics for reducing vomiting related to acute gastroenteritis in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND: Vomiting is a common manifestation of acute gastroenteritis in children and adolescents. When untreated, it can be a hindrance to oral rehydration therapy, which is the cornerstone in the management of acute gastroenteritis. Evidence is needed concerning the safety and efficacy of antiemetic use for vomiting in acute gastroenteritis in children. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and effectiveness of antiemetics on gastroenteritis induced vomiting in children and adolescents. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and hand searches of relevant journals and abstract books of conferences. The search was re-run and is up to date as on 20 July 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing antiemetics with placebo or no treatment, in children and adolescents under the age of 18, for vomiting due to gastroenteritis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials involving 1,020 participants. Mean time to cessation of vomiting in one study was 0.34 days less with dimenhydrinate suppository compared to placebo (P value = 0.036). Pooled data from three studies comparing oral ondansetron with placebo showed: a reduction in the immediate hospital admission rate (RR 0.40, NNT 17, 95% CI 10 to 100) but no difference between the hospitalization rates at 72 hours after discharge from the Emergency Department (ED); a reduction in IV rehydration rates both during the ED stay (RR 0.41, NNT 5, 95% CI 4 to 8), and in follow-up to 72 hours after discharge from the ED stay (worst-best scenario for ondansetron RR 0.57, NNT 6, 95% CI 4 to 13) and an increase in the proportion of patients with cessation of vomiting (RR 1.34, NNT 5, 95% CI 3 to 7). No significant difference was noted in the revisit rates or adverse events, although diarrhea was reported as a side effect in four of the five ondansetron studies. In one study the proportion of patients with cessation of vomiting in 24 hours was (58%) with IV ondansetron, (17%) placebo and (33%) in the metoclopramide group (P value = 0.039). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Oral ondansetron increased the proportion of patients who had ceased vomiting and reduced the number needing intravenous rehydration and immediate hospital admission. Intravenous ondansetron and metoclopramide reduced the number of episodes of vomiting and hospital admission, and dimenhydrinate as a suppository reduced the duration of vomiting.

An AMSTAR assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of oral healthcare interventions published in the Journal of Applied Oral Science (JAOS)

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are not an assembly of anecdotes but a distillation of current best available evidence on a particular topic and as such have an important role to play in evidence-based healthcare. A substantial proportion of these systematic reviews focus on interventions, and are able to provide clinicians with the opportunity to understand and translate the best available evidence on the effects of these healthcare interventions into clinical practice. The importance of systematic reviews in summarising and identifying the gaps in evidence which might inform new research initiatives is also widely acknowledged. Their potential impact on practice and research makes their methodological quality especially important as it may directly infuence their utility for clinicians, patients and policy makers. The objectives of this study were to identify systematic reviews of oral healthcare interventions published in the Journal of Applied Oral Science (JAOS) and to evaluate their methodological quality using the evaluation tool, AMSTAR. METHODS: Potentially eligible systematic reviews in JAOS were identifed through an electronic search of the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO). Details of the relevant aspects of methodology as reported in these systematic reviews were extracted from the full text publications. Methodological quality was assessed independently by two reviewers using the AMSTAR questionnaire. RESULTS: Five systematic reviews were identifed, one of which was subsequently excluded as it was a review of a diagnostic test. Summary AMSTAR scores for the four included reviews were: 1, 5, 2 and 4 out of a maximum score of 11 (range 1-5, mean 3) with only one of the reviews scoring 5. CONCLUSION: AMSTAR evaluation of the methodological quality of the relatively small number of systematic reviews published in JAOS illustrated that there was room for improvement. Pre-publication and editorial appraisal of future systematic reviews might beneft from the application of tools such as AMSTAR and is to be recommended.

Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions using AMSTAR.

Appraisal of the methodological quality of systematic reviews would reflect on their utility for the clinicians and policymakers. This study was done to assess the quality of systematic reviews published in five leading Indian medical journals using AMSTAR. 22 systematic reviews of healthcare interventions were identified. The scores ranged 0 to 10 (mean 3.77 and median 2.5), 9 reviews scored > 4/11. Most frequent ‘yes’ and ‘no’ scores were: publication status as an inclusion criterion (12 / 22), respectively and duplicate study selection and data extraction (17 /22). Several suboptimal aspects of methodological quality were identified in the reviews evaluated.

Hand and ultrasonic instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment of permanent teeth

Root canal treatment is a frequently performed dental procedure and is carried out on teeth in which irreversible pulpitis has led to necrosis of the dental pulp. Removal of the necrotic tissue remnants and cleaning and shaping of the root canal are important phases of root canal treatment. Treatment options include the use of hand and rotary instruments and methods using ultrasonic or sonic equipment. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials were to determine the relative clinical effectiveness of hand instrumentation versus ultrasonic instrumentation alone or in conjunction with hand instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment of permanent teeth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The search strategy retrieved 226 references from the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (7), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (12), MEDLINE (192), EMBASE (8) and LILACS (7). No language restriction was applied. The last electronic search was conducted on December 13th, 2007. Screening of eligible studies was conducted in duplicate and independently. RESULTS: Results were to be expressed as fixed-effect or random-effects models using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes with 95 percent confdence intervals. Heterogeneity was to be investigated including both clinical and methodological factors. No eligible randomized controlled trials were identifed. CONCLUSIONS: This review illustrates the current lack of published or ongoing randomized controlled trials and the unavailability of high-level evidence based on clinically relevant outcomes referring to the effectiveness of ultrasonic instrumentation used alone or as an adjunct to hand instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment. In the absence of reliable research-based evidence, clinicians should base their decisions on clinical experience, individual circumstances and in conjunction with patients' preferences where appropriate. Future randomized controlled trials might focus more closely on evaluating the effectiveness of combinations of these interventions with an emphasis on not only clinically relevant, but also patient-centered outcomes.

A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of reports of clinical trials published in six Brazilian dental journals indexed in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO)

INTRODUCTION: Open access publishing is becoming increasingly popular within the biomedical sciences. SciELO, the Scientific Electronic Library Online, is a digital library covering a selected collection of Brazilian scientific journals many of which provide open access to full-text articles.This library includes a number of dental journals some of which may include reports of clinical trials in English, Portuguese and/or Spanish. Thus, SciELO could play an important role as a source of evidence for dental healthcare interventions especially if it yields a sizeable number of high quality reports. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify reports of clinical trials by handsearching of dental journals that are accessible through SciELO, and to assess the overall quality of these reports. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic versions of six Brazilian dental Journals indexed in SciELO were handsearched at www.scielo.br in September 2008. Reports of clinical trials were identified and classified as controlled clinical trials (CCTs - prospective, experimental studies comparing 2 or more healthcare interventions in human beings) or randomized controlled trials (RCTs - a random allocation method is clearly reported), according to Cochrane eligibility criteria. CRITERIA TO ASSESS METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY INCLUDED: method of randomization, concealment of treatment allocation, blinded outcome assessment, handling of withdrawals and losses and whether an intention-to-treat analysis had been carried out. RESULTS: The search retrieved 33 CCTs and 43 RCTs. A majority of the reports provided no description of either the method of randomization (75.3 percent) or concealment of the allocation sequence (84.2 percent). Participants and outcome assessors were reported as blinded in only 31.2 percent of the reports. Withdrawals and losses were only clearly described in 6.5 percent of the reports and none mentioned an intention-to-treat analysis or any similar ...