ABSTRACT
Aim Service evaluation of our dental hospital paediatric liaison nursing (DH-PLN) service which provides an additional route for information sharing about safeguarding concerns via an agreed pathway for two-way communication with public health nurses.Method Retrospective analysis of clinical records of all children referred by DH teams to PLN in the three months October-December 2016.Results One hundred and four children were referred; mean age was 6.2 years, 89.4% from Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintiles 4 and 5, and 70.2% were attending for dental general anaesthesia. The most common referral reason was dental neglect in 66.3%, followed by missed appointments in 50.0%. The PLN checked child health databases and shared information with health visitors and school nurses (46.2% and 53.8% respectively). Feedback retrieved included known child maltreatment risk factors in 7.7%. This prompted additional child protection referrals to children's social services for seven children (6.7%). Dental outcomes six months later were: treatment complete in 50.0%, treatment ongoing 28.8%, discharged to original referrer with treatment incomplete in 21.1%.Conclusion This DH-PLN service promotes integrated multidisciplinary working, helping overcome barriers to dentistry's involvement in safeguarding. It facilitates more accurate assessments of risk of harm to children receiving dental care and prompts additional child protection referrals to social services.
Subject(s)
Child Abuse , Child , Communication , Family , Humans , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Neglect of a child's oral health can lead to pain, poor growth and impaired quality of life. In populations where there is a high prevalence of dental caries, the determination of which children are experiencing dental neglect is challenging. This systematic review aims to identify the features of oral neglect in children. METHODS: Fifteen databases spanning 1947-2012 were searched; these were supplemented by hand searching of 4 specialist journals, 5 websites and references of full texts. Included: studies of children 0-18 years with confirmed oral neglect undergoing a standardised dental examination; excluded: physical/sexual abuse. All relevant studies underwent two independent reviews (+/- 3rd review) using standardised critical appraisal. RESULTS: Of 3863 potential studies screened, 83 studies were reviewed and 9 included (representing 1595 children). Features included: failure or delay in seeking dental treatment; failure to comply with/complete treatment; failure to provide basic oral care; co-existent adverse impact on the child e.g. pain and swelling. Two studies developed and implemented 'dental neglect' screening tools with success. The importance of Quality of Life tools to identify impact of neglected dental care are also highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: A small body of literature addresses this topic, using varying definitions of neglect, and standards of oral examination. While failure/delay in seeking care with adverse dental consequences were highlighted, differentiating dental caries from dental neglect is difficult, and there is a paucity of data on precise clinical features to aid in this distinction. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Diagnosing dental neglect can be challenging, influencing a reluctance to report cases. Published evidence does exist to support these referrals when conditions as above are described, although further quality case control studies defining distinguishing patterns of dental caries would be welcome.
