Clinical evaluation of ferric oxalate in relieving dentine hypersensitivity.

Previous in vitro permeability and scanning electron microscopic (SEM) studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of the oxalate ion in dentine permeability reduction and effective tubule occlusion. The aim of this randomized double-blind, split mouth 4-week clinical study, therefore was to determine whether a 1-min application of ferric oxalate (Sensodyne Sealant) on exposed root dentine was effective in reducing dentine hypersensitivity (DH). Thirteen subjects [8F:5M, mean age 46.2 (s.d. 4.15) years] completed the study. The subjective response was evaluated by tactile, thermal and evaporative methods of assessment. Data were collected at baseline and post-application at +5 min and 4 weeks. Analysis was based on paired t-test (P=0.05) and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests. No statistically significant differences were noted between ferric oxalate and placebo preparations at +5 min and 4 weeks for any of the test stimuli. There was, however, a clear trend towards immediate reduction (+5 min) in DH reverting back to baseline values at 4 weeks with the exception of the Biomat Thermal Probe mean values, which maintained the reductions in DH compared with placebo. The results of the present study demonstrated that a 1-min application of ferric oxalate is both rapid and effective in reducing DH although its long-term effectiveness still needs to be determined.

Further statistics in dentistry Part 8: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

A systematic review of research evidence is an efficient approach to integrating existing information, invariably a multiplicity of published articles, with a view to establishing whether the scientific findings are consistent. If so, it may be possible to draw conclusions and make recommendations about treatment regimens or observed effects which have greater credence than those obtained from individual studies. The systematic review relies on a specified checklist which determines which articles should be included in the review, and how each should be critically appraised to provide relevant information relating to the focus of the review.

Further statistics in dentistry. Part 9: Bayesian statistics.

Statistics can be defined as the methods used to assimilate data, so that guidance can be given, and conclusions drawn, in situations which involve uncertainty. In particular, statistical inference is concerned with drawing conclusions about particular aspects of a population when that population cannot be studied in full. Uncertainty arises here because the totality of the information is not available. Instead, to make inferences about the population, it is necessary to rely on a sample of data which is selected from the population; this sample data may be augmented, in certain circumstances, by auxiliary information which is obtained independently of the sample data. Clearly, uncertainty lies at the heart of statistics and statistical inference. This uncertainty is measured by a probability which therefore forms the crux of statistics and must be properly understood in order to interpret a statistical analysis.

Further statistics in dentistry. Part 7: repeated measures.

Consider the situation in which there is a single quantitative variable of interest that is measured on each individual on several different occasions. Typically, these occasions are defined time points (usually including pre-treatment as well as various post-treatment times), so that each individual contributes a series of readings. The main objective of the study may be to compare the responses on this variable when each individual has been assigned to one of two or more treatments groups.

Further statistics in dentistry. Part 4: Clinical trials 2.

The principles which underlie a well-designed clinical trial were introduced in a previous paper. The trial should be controlled (to ensure that the appropriate comparisons are made), randomised (to avoid allocation bias) and, preferably, blinded (to obviate assessment bias). However, taken in isolation, these concepts will not necessarily ensure that meaningful conclusions can be drawn from the study. It is essential that the sample size is large enough to enable the effects of interest to be estimated precisely, and to detect any real treatment differences.

Further statistics in dentistry: Part 1: Research designs 1.

This new series of articles is designed to supplement, rather than replace, the material contained in the earlier series on statistics in dentistry published in the British Dental Journal and subsequently made available in book form.(1) With the increasing availability of calculators, personal computers and computer statistical software packages, the need for details of the 'nuts and bolts' of statistical theory has diminished, but the need for an understanding of how and when such theory should be applied, and how studies should be designed to make best use of it, has probably increased. It is with these thoughts in mind that this new series is being offered.

Dentists' perceptions of dentine hypersensitivity and knowledge of its treatment.

The aim of the present investigation was to determine by questionnaire, UK dentists' perception of Dentine Hypersensitivity (DH) and knowledge of its treatment. A total of 403 questionnaires were sent to a selected group of UK dentists who had either inquired about further postgraduate education or had attended a course at the Eastman Dental Institute/Hospital. A total of 181 of 403 dentists (44.9%) (118M; 36F, 17 no response, mean age 38.2 years [s.d. 8.97]) returned the questionnaire. About 92.8% (n=168) of responding dentists claimed to see patients with DH in their practice. According to the dentists' replies at least one of four of their patients suffered from the complaint. About 71.8% (n=130) of dentists reported that DH was a severe problem in at least 10% of their patients and that pain from DH lasted no more than 4 weeks. Most of responding dentists claimed to be asked about DH by their patients and stated that they offered advice or treatment to their patients. Nearly 87.3% (n=158) of responding dentists provided a wide range of treatment options/advice which included both in-office and over-the-counter (OTC) products. Popular responses included desensitizing pastes/gels, Topical F(-) varnishes and toothpastes/rinses/gels, advice on atraumatic tooth brushing, dentine bonding agents (DBA), glass-ionomer cements (GIC) and other unspecified restorations. Of the various in-office treatments Duraphat was the most cited choice of varnish/primer options. Sensodyne toothpaste was the most popular of the specified OTC products. Most dentists appeared to understand the aetiological features associated with DH and provided a wide range of factors including the effects of incorrect tooth brushing, dietary acids as well as the possible influence on non-dental topics such as stress. Most responding dentists believed that their advice on DH was generally effective although they did highlight that certain aspects on the condition were lacking such as appropriate scientific information including the prevention of DH and its treatment. The results from the present study highlight several discrepancies in the perception and knowledge of the treatment of DH between dentists and their patients. The results from this study are, however, reasonably consistent with those previously reported by Dutch investigators. The results from this study also highlighted a need for guidelines on the aetiology, prevention and treatment of DH for both dentists and their patients. The reported average frequency and duration of discomfort from DH by the responding dentists appeared to be consistent with the available literature.

Dentine hypersensitivity in subjects recruited for clinical trials: clinical evaluation, prevalence and intra-oral distribution.

Relatively few studies have reported on the frequency, distribution and severity of dentine hypersensitivity (DH) in subjects recruited for clinical trials of desensitizing agents. Potential subjects (n= 48 M, 81 F, mean age 35.1 years) for inclusion into such a study were screened to determine the extent of the problem. 117 subjects (41 M, 76 F) mean age 24.9 years were clinically examined. Evaluation by questionnaire indicated that the prevalence of DH was proportionately higher in the 20-29.9 years (34.9%), and 30-39.9 years groups (33.3%), respectively. Sensitivity to cold was the main presenting symptom. Tactile (probe) and cold air (dental air syringe) stimuli were used to clinically evaluate DH. Of the teeth eligible for evaluation 1561/3136 (49.8%) responded to either one or both of the test stimuli; 274/3136 (8.7%) responded to tactile only stimulation, 779/3136 (24.8%) to thermal only stimulation and 508/3136 (16.2%) to both tactile and thermal stimulation. Of those teeth responding to the stimuli, 477 (30.6%) were premolars, 437 (28%) incisors, 415 (26.8%) molars and 232 (14.9%) canines. The results agree with those of previously reported studies in that DH is most frequently observed on premolars and that proportionately more teeth are sensitive to evaporative than to tactile stimulation. Furthermore it would appear from the results of the study that tactile is less effective than thermal/evaporative stimulation in the evaluation of DH.

The effect of increasing vertical dimension of occlusion on facial aesthetics.

AIM: To investigate the effect of increasing the vertical dimension of occlusion on facial aesthetics. SETTING: General practice. METHOD: Questionnaires were sent to 96 patients who had been treated in the practice during the period of July 1998 to December 2000, resulting in an overall 72% response rate. All these patients had had their occlusal vertical dimension increased. Photographs of patients were taken before, during and after treatment. The questionnaire asked their opinion on the effects of the treatment on their facial features. To obtain an objective view to substantiate the opinions of the patients, a panel of five judges reviewed the before and after photographs and filled in their own questionnaires. RESULTS: Of the patients who responded to the questionnaire, 79.7% said they looked younger after the treatment. The panel thought 81.2% of the patients treated whose photographs they reviewed looked younger. CONCLUSION: Increasing the vertical dimension of occlusion can have far reaching effects on facial aesthetics, not just on the peri-oral areas but on the whole face.

Further statistics in dentistry, Part 5: Diagnostic tests for oral conditions.

A diagnostic test is a simple test, sometimes based on a clinical measurement, which is used when the gold-standard test providing a definitive diagnosis of a given condition is too expensive, invasive or time-consuming to perform. The diagnostic test can be used to diagnose a dental condition in an individual patient or as a screening device in a population of apparently healthy individuals.

Further statistics in dentistry. Part 2: Research designs 2.

To facilitate statistical discussion, it is essential to have an understanding of factors, effects, interactions, confounding, bias, estimation and hypothesis testing, to name but a few terms commonly used in statistical investigations in dentistry. These terms were explained in the previous paper in this series. This second paper is concerned with describing and differentiating between the various research designs that may be adopted.

Developing an index of restorative dental treatment need.

The process undertaken to establish an initial pilot index for restorative dental treatment is described. Following consultation with a wide range of clinicians and others, an outline framework for the index was developed and comprised three main components: 1. Patient identified need for treatment: the data from the patient perceived need questionnaire were inconclusive; 2. Complexity of treatment (assessed by clinicians): this was found to be a practical tool capable of being used by a range of dentists. A booklet has been produced which describes the process of using the scoring system; 3. Priority for treatment (assessed by clinicians): three levels of priority were identified; the highest priority was assigned to patients with inherited or developmental defects that justify complex care (eg clefts of the lip and palate). The initial development of the index has had some success in a difficult area. The treatment complexity component is the most developed and may allow both referrers and commissioners of specialist restorative dentistry to determine appropriate use of skilled clinicians' expertise.

Comparison of dentine hypersensitivity in selected occidental and oriental populations.

Epidemiological data on dentine hypersensitivity (DH) prevalence are limited. Few studies have compared prevalence between populations. The aim of this investigation, therefore, was to compare the perception and prevalence of DH in two distinct non-periodontal practice populations, one U.K. and one Korean. Completed questionnaires from 557 patients (230 males and 327 females, comprising 115 males and 162 females, mean age 41.7 years (s.d.=14.36), U.K. and 115 males and 165 females, mean age 29.7 years (s.d.=11.86), Korean) were collected. Analysis was by frequency distribution and cross-tabulation (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)). DH prevalence was similar and at levels comparable with those reported previously. Prevalence was higher in the third and fourth decades in both populations. Although there were no differences between U.K. or Korean males and U.K. or Korean females, there was a significant difference between gender reporting of DH, with more females complaining of DH than males (standard normal deviation (SND)=4.3, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.1134-0.2736). DH appeared to be regarded by patients as not severe in most cases, so treatment was not generally sought. Of those who claimed to have sought treatment, a significant number had received restorative treatment. Of those patients, only 23.3% of U.K. and or=7 days in either population. The results indicated that there were no significant differences between U.K.- and Korean-based populations in their perception of DH, with the exception that more females complained of sensitivity than males in both groups. Overall, DH was not considered a major dental problem by most patients in either of the populations.

Is modelling dental caries a 'normal' thing to do?

OBJECTIVE: To introduce and encourage the use of generalised linear models (GLMs) in analysing caries data that do not require the response to be treated necessarily as a sample from a normal distribution. BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN: At the present time, it is most likely that the sampling distribution of dmf/DMF in industrialised countries will not approximate normality. Generalised linear modelling can be conducted assuming many underlying distributions which, in fact, includes the normal distribution. In this paper three GLMs are employed (normal, Poisson, negative binomial) for modelling an example caries data set. In addition, a binomial model is used to model the dichotomous outcome of caries-free/caries-present. CLINICAL SETTING: The data comprised 871 Old Trafford, Manchester primary school children aged between 4 years 0 months and 5 years 11 months. RESULTS: The effect of one study covariate was prominent in a normal model applied to all available dmf data but not in two non-normal models which used dmf > 0 data only. Furthermore, the same covariate was significant at the 5% level in a binomial model indicating that it influenced whether or not caries was present and not the level of dmf. CONCLUSION: A suitable modelling approach for caries data is to employ a Poisson or a negative binomial model for the dmf/DMF response and a binomial model for the caries-free/caries-present outcome. This allows separate estimation of those factors which influence the magnitude of caries and those factors which influence whether caries is actually present or not.

Comparison of clinical outcomes following treatment of chronic adult periodontitis with subgingival scaling or subgingival scaling plus metronidazole gel.

BACKGROUND, AIMS: Conventional treatment of chronic periodontitis involves mechanical debridement of periodontal pockets. Recently, subgingival antimicrobials have been used adjunctively following such debridement. This 2-centre study compared the clinical effects of subgingival scaling (SRP) with SRP plus subgingival application of 25% metronidazole gel, Elyzol (SRP+gel), in patients with chronic adult periodontitis. METHOD: Voluntary informed written consent was obtained from 45 subjects at the Eastman (mean age 46, range 34-63) and 43 subjects at RAF Halton (mean age 47, range 34-71) who participated in this blind, randomised split-mouth design study. All had at least 2 sites in each quadrant with probing pocket depth (PPD) > or = 5 mm. PPD, bleeding on probing (BOP), and clinical probing attachment levels (CAL) measured using a stent, were recorded at baseline and at 1, 3, 6 and 9 months post-therapy. After subgingival scaling of all quadrants, 2 quadrants were randomly selected to be treated with metronidazole gel. RESULTS: A paired t-test on baseline values showed no bias between groups. Both treatments effectively reduced the signs of periodontitis. At each follow-up visit, reduction in PPD, CAL and BOP after the combined treatment was greater than for SRP alone. Paired t-tests showed that the improvement in the SRP+gel group was statistically significantly better (p<0.001) than for SRP alone (mean 0.5 +/- 0.6 mm. 95% CI 0.4-0.6 mm.) Similarly, the % of sites which improved to a final pocket depth of < or = 3 mm and the % of sites which improved over the 9 months of the study by as much as > or = 2 mm were greater for SRP+gel than for SRP alone. CONCLUSIONS: At the end of the study, the mean reductions for PPD were 1.0 mm (SRP) compared to 1.5 mm (SRP+gel), and for CAL they were 0.4 mm (SRP) compared to 0.8 mm (SRP+gel), with mean difference for CAL between treatments of 0.4 +/- 0.6 mm (95% confidence intervals of 0.3-0.6 mm). The combination therapy of SRP+gel was superior to the conventional treatment of SRP alone, and these differences were maintained for 9 months.

Perceptions of dentine hypersensitivity in a general practice population.

Recent studies have attempted to determine the prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity (DH) in both hospital and general practice. Results indicate that DH prevalence is higher in patients referred for specialist treatment than in general practice. The aim of this study was to determine perception and prevalence of DH in general practice. Completed questionnaires from 277 patients (115 males, 162 females, mean age 41.7 years [SD 14.36]) were collected. Self-reported DH prevalence (52%) was observed between the third and fourth decades, peaking in the third and in good agreement with that previously published (45.2%), and significantly more females complained of DH than males (SND=2.24, 95% CI 0.01734-0.2661). Cold was perceived as the most common cause of DH, in agreement with other studies. Only 12.6% of patients reported periodontal surgery compared to 15.5% previously. Of those who received hygiene therapy (67.9%) only 15.5% reported DH following treatment which mainly did not last >/=5 days. Most patients with DH did not perceive the condition as severe and did not seek treatment (75.1%). Only 23.3% used a desensitizing dentifrice. The results indicated that self-reporting of DH is lower than reported in a dental hospital population and was not perceived as a major dental problem by most patients in a general dental practice population.