Outcomes to evaluate care for adults with acute dental pain and infection: a systematic narrative review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify outcomes reported in peer-reviewed literature for evaluating the care of adults with acute dental pain or infection.DesignSystematic narrative review. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Primary research studies published in peer-reviewed literature and reporting care for adults with acute dental pain or infection across healthcare settings. Reports not in English language were excluded. STUDY SELECTION: Seven databases (CINAHL Plus, Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched from inception to December 2020. Risk of bias assessment used the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for randomised controlled trials and Quality Assessment Tool for Studies of Diverse Design for other study types. OUTCOMES: Narrative synthesis included all outcomes of care for adults with acute dental pain or infection. Excluded were outcomes about pain management to facilitate treatment, prophylaxis of postsurgical pain/infection or traumatic injuries. RESULTS: Searches identified 19 438 records, and 27 studies (dating from 1993 to 2020) were selected for inclusion. Across dental, pharmacy, hospital emergency and rural clinic settings, the studies were undertaken in high-income (n=20) and low/middle-income (n=7) countries. Two clinical outcome categories were identified: signs and symptoms of pain/infection and complications following treatment (including adverse drug reactions and reattendance for the same problem). Patient-reported outcomes included satisfaction with the care. Data collection methods included patient diaries, interviews and in-person reviews. DISCUSSION: A heterogeneous range of study types and qualities were included: one study, published in 1947, was excluded only due to lacking outcome details. Studies from dentistry reported just clinical outcomes; across wider healthcare more outcomes were included. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of clinical and patient-reported outcomes are recommended to evaluate care for adults with acute dental pain or infection. Further research is recommended to develop core outcomes aligned with the international consensus on oral health outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020210183.

'Advice, not orders'? The evolving legal status of clinical guidelines.

Healthcare professionals are expected to deliver care that is consistent with clinical guidelines. In this article, we show that the English courts are increasingly willing to be persuaded by written guidelines when determining the standard of care in cases of alleged clinical negligence. This reflects a wider shift in the approach taken by courts in a number of common law jurisdictions around the world. However, we argue that written guidelines are still only one element that courts should consider when determining the standard of care. It is possible to deliver perfect care that deviates from professional guidelines and even to deliver negligent care by uncritically following a guideline that is flawed. We further argue that written guidelines are relevant beyond defining the accepted standard of care. This is because the decision to deviate from a guideline suggests the existence of multiple approaches that should be discussed with patients as part of ensuring informed consent. It is therefore likely that written guidelines will become an even more prominent feature of the medicolegal landscape in future years.