Barriers to and facilitators for creating, disseminating, implementing, monitoring and evaluating oral health policies in the WHO African region: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To advance oral health policies (OHPs) in the World Health Organization (WHO) African region, barriers to and facilitators for creating, disseminating, implementing, monitoring and evaluating OHPs in the region were examined. METHODS: Global Health, Embase, PubMed, Public Affairs Information Service Index, ABI/Inform, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, Scopus, Dissertations Global, Google Scholar, WHO's Institutional Repository for Information Sharing (IRIS), the WHO Noncommunicable Diseases Document Repository and the Regional African Index Medicus and African Journals Online were searched. Technical officers at the WHO Regional Office for Africa were contacted. Research studies and policy documents reporting barriers to and facilitators for OHP in the 47 Member States in the WHO African region published between January 2002 and March 2024 in English, French or Portuguese were included. Frequencies were used to summarize quantitative data, and descriptive content analysis was used to code and classify barrier and facilitator statements. RESULTS: Eighty-eight reports, including 55 research articles and 33 policy documents, were included. The vast majority of the research articles and policy documents were country-specific, but they were lacking for most countries. Frequently mentioned barriers across policy at all stages included financial constraints, a limited and poorly organized workforce, deprioritization of oral health, the absence of health information systems, inadequate integration of oral health services within the overarching health system and limited oral health literacy. Facilitators included a renewed commitment to establishing national OHPs, recognition of a need to diversify the oral health workforce, and an increased understanding of the influence of social determinants of health among oral health care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Most countries lack a country-specific body of evidence to assist policymakers in anticipating barriers to and facilitators for OHPs. The barriers and facilitators relevant to disparate subnational, national, and regional conditions and circumstances must be considered to advance the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of OHPs in the WHO African region.

Advancing the concept of global oral health to strengthen actions for planetary health and One Health.

Advancing the concept of global oral health can help tackle the triple planetary crises of climate change, nature and biodiversity loss, and pollution and waste. A model for oral and planetary health places more explicit focus on understanding the state of the Earth's systems, changing environment in relation to planetary health boundaries and their impact on human well-being. This can facilitate a planet-centric critical thinking for equity in global oral health that contributes to UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Oral Health Policy and Research Capacity: Perspectives From Dental Schools in Africa.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The prioritisation of oral health in all health policies in the WHO African region is gaining momentum. Dental schools in this region are key stakeholders in informing the development and subsequent downstream implementation and monitoring of these policies. The objectives of our study are to determine how dental schools contribute to oral health policies (OHPs) in this region, to identify the barriers to and facilitators for engaging with other local stakeholders, and to understand their capacity to respond to population and public health needs. METHODS: We developed a needs assessment survey, including quantitative and qualitative questions. The survey was developed electronically in Qualtrics and distributed by email in February 2023 to the deans or other designees at dental schools in the WHO African region. Data were analysed in SAS version 9.4 and ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: The capacity for dental schools to respond to population and public health needs varied. Most schools have postgraduate programs to train the next generation of researchers. However, these programs have limitations that may hinder the students from achieving the necessary skills and training. A majority (75%) of respondents were aware of the existence of national OHPs and encountered a myriad of challenges when engaging with them, including a lack of coordination with other stakeholders, resources, and oral health professionals, and the low priority given to oral health. Their strengths as technical experts and researchers was a common facilitator for engaging with OHPs. CONCLUSION: Dental schools in the region face common challenges and facilitators in engaging in the OHP process. There were several school-specific research and training capacities that enabled them to respond to population and public health needs. Overall, shared challenges and facilitators can inform stakeholder dialogues at a national and subnational level and help develop tailored solutions for enhancing the oral health policy pipeline.

How oral health care organizations formulate actionable statements to inform practice and policy: A protocol for a systematic survey.

Background: Oral diseases are a major global public health problem that impacts the quality of life of those affected. While widespread consensus exists on the importance of high-quality, evidence-informed guidelines to inform practice and public health decisions in medicine, appropriate methodologies and standards are not commonly adhered to among producers of oral health guidelines. This systematic survey aims to identify organizations developing evidence-informed guidelines and policy documents in oral health globally, and describe the methods and processes used. Methods: We will conduct manual searches on the websites of guideline developers, Ministries of Health, and scientific societies. Additionally, we will systematically search electronic databases to identify published guidelines and collect the name of the responsible entity. We will include organizations that regularly develop guidelines on any oral health topic and that explicitly declare the inclusion of research evidence in its development process. Subsequently, we will use a standardized form to extract data about the characteristics of the organization, the characteristics of their guideline or policy documents, and their formal recommendation development processes. These data will be extracted from various sources, such as the organization's official website, the methods section of each guideline, or methodological handbooks. We will use descriptive statistics to analyze the extracted data. Discussion: This systematic survey will synthesize key characteristics and methodologies used by organizations developing evidence-informed guidelines. This study will provide the basis for future development of a sustainable and connected collaborative network for evidence-informed guidelines and policy documents in oral health globally. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and targeted dissemination of findings with the identified organizations. Our systematic survey represents a necessary first step toward improving the field of oral health policies and guidelines.

A practitioner's guide to developing critical appraisal skills: How to interpret the magnitude of clinical study results.

BACKGROUND: In the oral health literature, researchers sometimes report measures of association that are inappropriate for their study design. Clinicians using evidence to inform their practice should be able to interpret clinical study results on the basis of the types of measures of association, independent of what the researchers of a study reported. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors summarized which measures of association can be derived from experimental and observational studies and how to interpret them in the context of different study designs. They also suggested how inferences can be made on the basis of particular designs. RESULTS: Measures of association derived from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies differ from those of case-control and cross-sectional studies. These differences can be attributed to the temporality between exposures and outcomes inherent in the respective study designs. Different measures of association reported from the same study may lead to different clinical decisions. Furthermore, the same measure of association with the same effect estimate derived from different study designs may contribute to different clinical decisions. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Measures of association should be interpreted in the context of a particular study design. Study designs and specific measures of association should be considered when drawing conclusions from clinical studies. Clinicians using the literature to inform practice should be cognizant of measures of association reported for a particular study design and whether the authors have interpreted the measure of association correctly in the context of their chosen study design.

Policymakers' perceived barriers and facilitators in the use of research evidence in oral health policies and guidelines: a qualitative study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-informed oral health policies are crucial to improving patient and population outcomes, but policymakers and organisational leaders infrequently systematically incorporate research evidence. Although there is indirect evidence regarding challenges in other healthcare sectors, the use of evidence-informed oral health policies remains unstudied in oral health. This study aims to assess policymakers' perceived needs, barriers and facilitators in using research evidence to inform policies in oral health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a qualitative study situated within a phenomenological paradigm. We will conduct semistructured interviews with policymakers (5-10) affiliated with key organisations conducting guidance, policy statements, guidelines or any knowledge transfer deliverables in oral health. Organisations will be sampled purposively and with no geographical restrictions. All interviews will be recorded, and an audio transcript will be generated. Subsequently, a researcher will review and validate the transcripts. Data will be analysed using thematic analysis supported by ATLAS.ti software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was not sought because the study protocol met the criteria for exemption from such review according to the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau and the Spanish legislation (Law 14/2007 of 3 July, on biomedical research). Informed consent will be obtained from all subjects involved in this study. The findings of this study will be shared with participating organisations for feedback, disseminated in conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal adopting open science practices. STUDY REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/W4KG7).

The association between accessing dental services and nonventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia among 2019 Medicaid beneficiaries.

In this 2019 cross-sectional study, we analyzed hospital records for Medicaid beneficiaries who acquired nonventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia. The results suggest that preventive dental treatment in the 12 months prior or periodontal therapy in the 6 months prior to a hospitalization is associated with a reduced risk of NVHAP.

Incidence, mortality, and cost trends in nonventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia in medicaid beneficiaries, 2015-2019.

Nonventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and costs during an episode of acute care. We examined NVHAP incidence, mortality, and costs of Medicaid beneficiaries over a 5-year period (2015-2019). Overall NVHAP incidence was 2.63 per 1,000 patient days, and mortality was 7.76%, with an excess cost per NVHAP case of $20,189.

Barriers to and facilitators for the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of oral health policies in the WHO Africa region: A scoping review protocol.

Background: Evidence-informed oral health policies (OHP) can be instrumental in ending the neglect of oral health globally. When appropriately developed and implemented, OHP can improve the efficiency of healthcare systems and the quality of health outcomes. However, more than half of the countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) African region do not have an oral health policy or even the existence of a policy in need of additional and more national-specific OHP as part of non-communicable diseases and universal health coverage agendas. The objective of this protocol's study is to determine the barriers to and facilitators for the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of OHP in the WHO Africa region. Methods: We will conduct a systematic search in Global Health, Embase, PubMed, PAIS, ABI/Inform, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, Scopus, databases that index gray literature, and the WHO policy repositories. We will include qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research studies and OHP documents published since January 1, 2002, which address stakeholders' perceptions and experiences regarding barriers to and facilitators for the creation, dissemination, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of OHP in countries part of the WHO African region. We will produce descriptive statistics (frequencies and proportions) for quantitative data and conduct descriptive content analysis for qualitative data. Discussion: To effectively establish evidence-based OHP in the WHO African region, it is crucial to recognize existing challenges and opportunities for progress. The findings of this review will be relevant for Chief Dental Officers at ministries of health, administrators of dental schools, or academic institutions in the WHO African region and will inform a stakeholder dialogue meeting in Kenya in November of 2023. Registration: Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/9KMWR.

Screening testing in health care: Getting it right.

BACKGROUND: There is a movement to engage oral health care professionals in administering tests to identify people at risk of developing contagious diseases and other medical conditions. The purpose of this overview was to provide clinicians with fundamental concepts to understand how to evaluate a screening test's capability to give a correct result and its implications for practice (health outcomes). TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors reviewed epidemiologic and statistical articles addressing the purpose of performing screening tests for medical conditions with a special emphasis on understanding and interpreting test results on the basis of specific test characteristics. RESULTS: Tests with different sensitivities and specificities will provide different probabilities of correctly classifying people with or without a disease of interest. By understanding how to interpret tests results and how to communicate the consequences (that is, impact on health outcomes) of positive and negative test results, oral health care professionals will be able to generate appropriate medical referrals and determine the need for further testing, as well as provide a public service. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: An understanding by oral health care professionals of how to interpret screening test results will benefit their patients substantially and, in the case of contagious diseases, the public at large.

Long COVID and oral health care considerations.

BACKGROUND: People who have recovered from the initial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection are at risk of developing long COVID, a prolonged suite of signs and symptoms that may interfere with daily life and the ability to undergo routine oral health care. METHODS: The available literature on long COVID was reviewed and compiled to produce a review of the syndrome as currently understood. Articles were evaluated with a focus on how long COVID may affect the provision of oral health care and on ways in which treatment may need to be modified to best care for this vulnerable patient population. RESULTS: Long COVID includes a wide variety of symptoms, such as fatigue, shortness of breath, chest pain, risk of developing thromboembolism, and neurologic and psychiatric complications. These symptoms may arise at various times and in a wide range of patients, and they may necessitate modification of routine oral health care interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations for the treatment of affected people in an oral health care setting are presented, including a thorough evaluation of the patient history and current status, understanding of how related symptoms may affect oral health care interventions, and which modifications to treatment are needed to provide safe and appropriate care. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Oral health care professionals must be aware of long COVID, an increasingly prevalent condition with a widely variable presentation and impact. Oral health care professionals should be prepared to treat these patients safely in an outpatient oral health setting.

Developing a Standard Set of Patient-centred Outcomes for Adult Oral Health - An International, Cross-disciplinary Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a minimum Adult Oral Health Standard Set (AOHSS) for use in clinical practice, research, advocacy and population health. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An international oral health working group (OHWG) was established, of patient advocates, researchers, clinicians and public health experts to develop an AOHSS. PubMed was searched for oral health clinical and patient-reported measures and case-mix variables related to caries and periodontal disease. The selected patient-reported outcome measures focused on general oral health, and oral health-related quality of life tools. A consensus was reached via Delphi with parallel consultation of subject matter content experts. Finally, comments and input were elicited from oral health stakeholders globally, including patients/consumers. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 1,453 results. After inclusion/exclusion criteria, 959 abstracts generated potential outcomes and case-mix variables. Delphi rounds resulted in a consensus-based selection of 80 individual items capturing 31 outcome and case-mix concepts. Global reviews generated 347 responses from 87 countries, and the patient/consumer validation survey elicited 129 responses. This AOHSS includes 25 items directed towards patients (including demographics, the impact of their oral health on oral function, a record of pain and oral hygiene practices, and financial implications of care) and items for clinicians to complete, including medical history, a record of caries and periodontal disease activity, and types of dental treatment delivered. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, utilising a robust methodology, a standardised core set of oral health outcome measures for adults, with a particular emphasis on caries and periodontal disease, was developed.