Un "boxing" the reality: Knowledge, attitude, and perception of orthodontists, dental practitioners, and orthodontic patients toward mouthguards' wear during contact sports-A cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Mouthguards (MGs) have the potential to prevent contact sport-related dental injuries. However, varying perceptions of their effectiveness persist, influencing recommendations by dental professionals. AIM: To assess the attitudes, knowledge, and perceptions of orthodontists, other dental practitioners (general dentists and other dental specialists), and orthodontic patients involved in contact sports regarding the use of MGs. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional survey was designed to collect information from dental clinicians (orthodontists and other dental practitioners) and their orthodontic patients about using MGs during sports participation. A convenience sampling technique was used to recruit the participants for an online survey. A total of 107 (32 males/75 females) dental clinicians and 147 (75 males/72 females) orthodontic patients (mean age 17.5 ± 5.84 years) participated in the study. Pre-validated questionnaires, specifically designed for dental clinicians and orthodontic patients, were used. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (version 28.0; SPSS). RESULTS: Nearly 50% of dental clinicians have recently recommended MGs to their patients in their clinical practice out of which 59% preferred the stock type; 33% of dental clinicians enquired their patients about involvement in contact sports during initial visits. The majority of orthodontic patients acquired knowledge about MGs through the Internet. More than half of orthodontic patients expressed unwillingness to pay for MGs, and 89% of orthodontic patients found using MGs during contact sports uncomfortable. CONCLUSION: The findings provide valuable insights into the practices and attitudes of dental clinicians and orthodontic patients regarding MGs, their recommendations, and the comfort levels associated with using them during contact sports.

White spot lesions, plaque accumulation and salivary caries-associated bacteria in clear aligners compared to fixed orthodontic treatment. A systematic review and meta- analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the available evidence regarding the incidence and severity of white spot lesions (WSLs), plaque accumulation and salivary caries-associated bacteria(SCB) in clear aligners (CA) verses conventional fixed (CF) orthodontic appliances. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Google Scholar, Clinical trial registry, OpenGrey and ProQuest were done for all relevant studies. Eligibility criteria were; Randomized Controlled Trials and Non-Randomized Studies that compared the incidence and severity of WSLs, plaque accumulation and SCB between CA and CF appliances in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. The risk of bias(ROB) and certainty of evidence was assessed independently by two reviewers using Cochrane's ROB and GRADEpro, respectively. Standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to estimate the effect size using STATA 17 software. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies met the eligibility criteria, and eight were suitable for meta-analysis. The qualitative results showed lower incidence and severity of WSLs, plaque accumulation, and SCB in CA group compared to CF appliances. The pooled results showed significantly lower plaque accumulation(SMD - 1.58;95%CI:-2.57,0.58;p = 0.002) in CA compared to CF appliances. CONCLUSIONS: A moderate-quality evidence reveals less plaque accumulation and less SCB in CA, which might be related to the reduced incidence and severity of WSLs associated with CA when compared with CF appliances. However, the results of the present study should be interpreted with caution given the high ROB among some of the included studies as well as the marked heterogeneity across the studies. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For patients who can be treated with either CA or CF appliances, CA may be a better choice concerning oral health. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/kcpvb ).

Orthodontic Curricula in Undergraduate Dental Education-A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate commonalities and variations in the learning outcomes, curriculum content, assessment methods, and competencies in undergraduate orthodontic curricula globally. METHODS: This scoping review followed the updated methodological guidance proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A search on electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Embase was conducted for the last 25 years. Google Scholar was used to identify eligible unpublished and grey literature. RESULTS: The total number of reports identified was 231. After removal of 62 duplicates, 169 reports were included in the title and abstract screening. Finally, 17 studies were included in the review, which included 13 cross-sectional surveys, three expert panel proceedings, and one discussion paper. Marked variations were reported in undergraduate orthodontic curricula and competency assessments at the level of individual countries, regionally as well as globally. The challenges of imparting competency in orthodontic treatment during undergraduate dental education are also acknowledged. CONCLUSION: Lack of consistency in undergraduate orthodontic education was evidenced by several Delphi studies aiming to develop a consensus on orthodontic teaching in undergraduate programs. A common message emanating from the available studies on undergraduate orthodontic education seems to emphasize a focus on assessment and diagnosis of the orthodontic treatment needs of patients and a basic understanding of contemporary treatment options to facilitate patient referral.