-
European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry Jun 2019The use of antibiotics by health care professionals has benefitted humankind to a great extent. Recent reports show an increasing trend of antibiotic prescription by...
AIM
The use of antibiotics by health care professionals has benefitted humankind to a great extent. Recent reports show an increasing trend of antibiotic prescription by paediatric dentists. This systematic review aims to address the current pattern of antibiotics prescription among the paediatric dental population according to the evidence-based literature. The question of research addressed here deals with the assessment of the correlation of the injudicious prescription of antibacterial agents and antibiotic resistance among the population of interest.
METHODS
Electronic search databases: PubMed, Ovid and Cochrane Library, were used to review studies as per their relevance and findings. Keywords for search were associated with population: 'paediatric patients', intervention: 'antibiotics treatment', 'prescribing behaviour', and outcomes: 'antibiotic resistance' RESULTS: A total of 542 abstracts were identified, 45 of which met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. A multifactorial relationship leading to increased prescription of antibiotics in paediatric dentistry was observed. Very few studies actually correlated this prescribing behaviour with resistance to these drugs. No consensus regarding the duration of antibiotic therapy or prophylaxis was found.
CONCLUSION
Insufficient literature support necessitates the requirement of increased evidence to draw a definitive association between the prescribing trends of antibiotics in paediatric dentistry and drug resistance. The development of intervention programmes like antibiotic stewardship ensuring collaboration between patients and paediatric dentists can ensure effective antibiotic prescription.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Dentists; Humans; Pediatric Dentistry
PubMed: 31246090
DOI: 10.23804/ejpd.2019.20.02.10 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene Nov 2018Musculoskeletal disorders affect a high percentage of dentists, dental hygienists and therapists. Static and awkward working postures are considered as major risk... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Musculoskeletal disorders affect a high percentage of dentists, dental hygienists and therapists. Static and awkward working postures are considered as major risk factors. Proper seat selection and use of magnification loupes are promoted for their ergonomic benefits. The aim of this review was to evaluate the existing empirical evidence on the effect of the above interventions on (i) correction of poor posture and (ii) reduction in musculoskeletal pain.
METHODS
The review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017058580). The Medline via Ovid, CINHAL via EBSCO, Web of Science, OpenGrey and EThOS electronic databases were searched. Prospective experimental studies were considered for inclusion. The Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included in the review. Four investigated the effect of loupes on posture and musculoskeletal pain, 4 the effect of the saddle seats on posture and one of the latter explored the combined effect of magnification and use of saddle seats on posture.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on a limited number of studies, the use of ergonomic saddle seats and dental loupes leads to improved working postures. The use of loupes appears to relieve shoulder, arm and hand pain. However, their effect on neck pain is scarce. None of the studies reported on the effect of the saddle seats on musculoskeletal pain. Future well-powered prospective longitudinal studies are deemed necessary to confirm the conclusions of this review.
Topics: Dental Hygienists; Dentists; Ergonomics; Humans; Lenses; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Occupational Diseases; Posture; Risk Factors; Sitting Position
PubMed: 29318741
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12327 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2018Dentistry is a profession with a high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) among practitioners, with symptoms often starting as early in the...
BACKGROUND
Dentistry is a profession with a high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) among practitioners, with symptoms often starting as early in the career as the student phase. Ergonomic interventions in physical, cognitive, and organisational domains have been suggested to prevent their occurrence, but evidence of their effects remains unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of ergonomic interventions for the prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among dental care practitioners.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO ProQuest, NIOSHTIC, NIOSHTIC-2, HSELINE, CISDOC (OSH-UPDATE), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal to August 2018, without language or date restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster RCTs, in which participants were adults, aged 18 and older, who were engaged in the practice of dentistry. At least 75% of them had to be free from musculoskeletal pain at baseline. We only included studies that measured at least one of our primary outcomes; i.e. physician diagnosed WMSD, self-reported pain, or work functioning.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three authors independently screened and selected 20 potentially eligible references from 946 relevant references identified from the search results. Based on the full-text screening, we included two studies, excluded 16 studies, and two are awaiting classification. Four review authors independently extracted data, and two authors assessed the risk of bias. We calculated the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous outcomes. We assessed the quality of the evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two RCTs (212 participants), one of which was a cluster-randomised trial. Adjusting for the design effect from clustering, reduced the total sample size to 210. Both studies were carried out in dental clinics and assessed ergonomic interventions in the physical domain, one by evaluating a multi-faceted ergonomic intervention, which consisted of imparting knowledge and training about ergonomics, work station modification, training and surveying ergonomics at the work station, and a regular exercise program; the other by studying the effectiveness of two different types of instrument used for scaling in preventing WMSDs. We were unable to combine the results from the two studies because of the diversity of interventions and outcomes.Physical ergonomic interventions. Based on one study, there is very low-quality evidence that a multi-faceted intervention has no clear effect on dentists' risk of WMSD in the thighs (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.42; 102 participants), or feet (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.41; 102 participants) when compared to no intervention over a six-month period. Based on one study, there is low-quality evidence of no clear difference in elbow pain (MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.11; 110 participants), or shoulder pain (MD -0.32, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.11; 110 participants) in participants who used light weight curettes with wider handles or heavier curettes with narrow handles for scaling over a 16-week period.Cognitive ergonomic interventions. We found no studies evaluating the effectiveness of cognitive ergonomic interventions.Organisational ergonomic interventions. We found no studies evaluating the effectiveness of organisational ergonomic interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is very low-quality evidence from one study showing that a multi-faceted intervention has no clear effect on dentists' risk of WMSD in the thighs or feet when compared to no intervention over a six-month period. This was a poorly conducted study with several shortcomings and errors in statistical analysis of data. There is low-quality evidence from one study showing no clear difference in elbow pain or shoulder pain in participants using light weight, wider handled curettes or heavier and narrow handled curettes for scaling over a 16-week period.We did not find any studies evaluating the effectiveness of cognitive ergonomic interventions or organisational ergonomic interventions.Our ability to draw definitive conclusions is restricted by the paucity of suitable studies available to us, and the high risk of bias of the studies that are available. This review highlights the need for well-designed, conducted, and reported RCTs, with long-term follow-up that assess prevention strategies for WMSDs among dental care practitioners.
Topics: Adult; Dental Equipment; Dental Instruments; Dentists; Equipment Design; Ergonomics; Exercise; Humans; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Occupational Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self Report
PubMed: 30320459
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011261.pub2 -
International Journal of Environmental... May 2020Musculoskeletal diseases and pain (MSDs) are prevalent among dental professionals. They cause a growing inability to work and premature leaving of the occupation. Thus,...
Musculoskeletal diseases and pain (MSDs) are prevalent among dental professionals. They cause a growing inability to work and premature leaving of the occupation. Thus, the objective of this review was to summarize the evidence of ergonomic interventions for the prevention of MSDs among dental professionals. This review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The literature search was carried out in May 2018, with an update in April 2019. Scientific databases such as MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed and Web of Science as well as reference lists of the included studies were used. Relevant data were extracted from the studies and summarized. The quality assessment was performed using a validated standardized instrument. Eleven studies were included in this review, of which four are of high quality. Eight studies focused on setting prevention strategies. Of those, in five studies, magnification loupes or prismatic spectacles were the subject of ergonomic interventions. Further subjects were the dental chair ( = 2) and dental instruments ( = 1). Three studies evaluated ergonomic training. In all studies, the ergonomic interventions had positive effects on the study outcome. Several ergonomic interventions to prevent MSDs among dental professionals were found to exert a positive effect on the prevalence of MSDs or working posture. This systematic review adds current evidence for the use of prismatic spectacles in order to prevent MSDs among dental professionals. Further intervention studies about the role of ergonomics for the prevention of MSDs among dental professionals are warranted.
Topics: Dentists; Ergonomics; Humans; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Occupational Diseases; Pain; Posture
PubMed: 32429439
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17103482 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Intimate partner violence (IPV) includes any violence (physical, sexual or psychological/emotional) by a current or former partner. This review reflects the current... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intimate partner violence (IPV) includes any violence (physical, sexual or psychological/emotional) by a current or former partner. This review reflects the current understanding of IPV as a profoundly gendered issue, perpetrated most often by men against women. IPV may result in substantial physical and mental health impacts for survivors. Women affected by IPV are more likely to have contact with healthcare providers (HCPs) (e.g. nurses, doctors, midwives), even though women often do not disclose the violence. Training HCPs on IPV, including how to respond to survivors of IPV, is an important intervention to improve HCPs' knowledge, attitudes and practice, and subsequently the care and health outcomes for IPV survivors.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of training programmes that seek to improve HCPs' identification of and response to IPV against women, compared to no intervention, wait-list, placebo or training as usual.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and seven other databases up to June 2020. We also searched two clinical trials registries and relevant websites. In addition, we contacted primary authors of included studies to ask if they knew of any relevant studies not identified in the search. We evaluated the reference lists of all included studies and systematic reviews for inclusion. We applied no restrictions by search dates or language.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing IPV training or educational programmes for HCPs compared with no training, wait-list, training as usual, placebo, or a sub-component of the intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures outlined by Cochrane. Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, undertook data extraction and assessed risks of bias. Where possible, we synthesised the effects of IPV training in a meta-analysis. Other analyses were synthesised in a narrative manner. We assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 19 trials involving 1662 participants. Three-quarters of all studies were conducted in the USA, with single studies from Australia, Iran, Mexico, Turkey and the Netherlands. Twelve trials compared IPV training versus no training, and seven trials compared the effects of IPV training to training as usual or a sub-component of the intervention in the comparison group, or both. Study participants included 618 medical staff/students, 460 nurses/students, 348 dentists/students, 161 counsellors or psychologists/students, 70 midwives and 5 social workers. Studies were heterogeneous and varied across training content delivered, pedagogy and time to follow-up (immediately post training to 24 months). The risk of bias assessment highlighted unclear reporting across many areas of bias. The GRADE assessment of the studies found that the certainty of the evidence for the primary outcomes was low to very low, with studies often reporting on perceived or self-reported outcomes rather than actual HCPs' practices or outcomes for women. Eleven of the 19 included studies received some form of research grant funding to complete the research. Within 12 months post-intervention, the evidence suggests that compared to no intervention, wait-list or placebo, IPV training: · may improve HCPs' attitudes towards IPV survivors (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.71, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.03; 8 studies, 641 participants; low-certainty evidence); · may have a large effect on HCPs' self-perceived readiness to respond to IPV survivors, although the evidence was uncertain (SMD 2.44, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.37; 6 studies, 487 participants; very low-certainty evidence); · may have a large effect on HCPs' knowledge of IPV, although the evidence was uncertain (SMD 6.56, 95% CI 2.49 to 10.63; 3 studies, 239 participants; very low-certainty evidence); · may make little to no difference to HCPs' referral practices of women to support agencies, although this is based on only one study (with 49 clinics) assessed to be very low certainty; · has an uncertain effect on HCPs' response behaviours (based on two studies of very low certainty), with one trial (with 27 participants) reporting that trained HCPs were more likely to successfully provide advice on safety planning during their interactions with standardised patients, and the other study (with 49 clinics) reporting no clear impact on safety planning practices; · may improve identification of IPV at six months post-training (RR 4.54, 95% CI 2.5 to 8.09) as in one study (with 54 participants), although three studies (with 48 participants) reported little to no effects of training on identification or documentation of IPV, or both. No studies assessed the impact of training HCPs on the mental health of women survivors of IPV compared to no intervention, wait-list or placebo. When IPV training was compared to training as usual or a sub-component of the intervention, or both, no clear effects were seen on HCPs' attitudes/beliefs, safety planning, and referral to services or mental health outcomes for women. Inconsistent results were seen for HCPs' readiness to respond (improvements in two out of three studies) and HCPs' IPV knowledge (improved in two out of four studies). One study found that IPV training improved HCPs' validation responses. No adverse IPV-related events were reported in any of the studies identified in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, IPV training for HCPs may be effective for outcomes that are precursors to behaviour change. There is some, albeit weak evidence that IPV training may improve HCPs' attitudes towards IPV. Training may also improve IPV knowledge and HCPs' self-perceived readiness to respond to those affected by IPV, although we are not certain about this evidence. Although supportive evidence is weak and inconsistent, training may improve HCPs' actual responses, including the use of safety planning, identification and documentation of IPV in women's case histories. The sustained effect of training on these outcomes beyond 12 months is undetermined. Our confidence in these findings is reduced by the substantial level of heterogeneity across studies and the unclear risk of bias around randomisation and blinding of participants, as well as high risk of bias from attrition in many studies. Further research is needed that overcomes these limitations, as well as assesses the impacts of IPV training on HCPs' behavioral outcomes and the well-being of women survivors of IPV.
Topics: Adult; Bias; Dentists; Female; Health Personnel; Humans; Intimate Partner Violence; Medical Staff; Midwifery; Nursing Staff; Psychology; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Social Workers; Students, Health Occupations
PubMed: 34057734
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012423.pub2 -
BMC Public Health May 2018People with uncontrolled diabetes are at greater risk for several oral health problems, particularly periodontal (gum) disease. Periodontal disease also impacts diabetes...
BACKGROUND
People with uncontrolled diabetes are at greater risk for several oral health problems, particularly periodontal (gum) disease. Periodontal disease also impacts diabetes control. Good oral hygiene and regular dental visits are recommended to prevent and manage oral health problems. Several studies have been conducted to assess the oral health knowledge, attitudes, and practices of people with diabetes yet a review of these findings has not yet been undertaken. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize current evidence on the knowledge, attitudes and practices of people with diabetes in relation to their oral health care.
METHODS
A systematic search of all literature was carried out in five databases using key search terms. The inclusion criteria were: 1) published in the English language; 2) from 2000 to November, 2017; 3) conducted on persons with any type of diabetes and of all ages; 4) explored at least one study outcome (knowledge or attitude or practices toward oral health care); and 5) used quantitative methods of data collection. No restrictions were placed on the quality and setting of the study.
RESULTS
A total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies included a total of 27,894 people with diabetes and were conducted in 14 countries. The review found that people with diabetes have inadequate oral health knowledge, poor oral health attitudes, and fewer dental visits. They rarely receive oral health education and dental referrals from their care providers. Provision of oral health education by diabetes care providers and referral to dentists when required, was associated with improved oral health behaviours among patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, people with diabetes have limited oral health knowledge and poor oral health behaviours. It is therefore essential to educate patients about their increased risk for oral health problems, motivate them for good oral health behaviours and facilitate access to dental care.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Oral Health
PubMed: 29716561
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-5485-7 -
Health Technology Assessment... Jun 2020Impacted third molars are third molars that are blocked, by soft tissue or bone, from fully erupting through the gum. This can cause pain and disease. The treatment...
BACKGROUND
Impacted third molars are third molars that are blocked, by soft tissue or bone, from fully erupting through the gum. This can cause pain and disease. The treatment options for people with impacted third molars are removal or retention with standard care. If there are pathological changes, the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance states that the impacted third molar should be removed.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to appraise the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molars compared with retention of, and standard care for, impacted third molars.
METHODS
Five electronic databases were searched (1999 to 29 April 2016) to identify relevant evidence [The Cochrane Library (searched 4 April 2016 and 29 April 2016), MEDLINE (searched 4 April 2016 and 29 April 2016), EMBASE (searched 4 April 2016 and 29 April 2016), EconLit (searched 4 April 2016 and 29 April 2016) and NHS Economic Evaluation Database (searched 4 April 2016)]. Studies that compared the prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molars with retention and standard care or studies that assessed the outcomes from either approach were included. The clinical outcomes considered were pathology associated with retention, post-operative complications following extraction and adverse effects of treatment. Cost-effectiveness outcomes included UK costs and health-related quality-of-life measures. In addition, the assessment group constructed a de novo economic model to compare the cost-effectiveness of a prophylactic removal strategy with that of retention and standard care.
RESULTS
The clinical review identified four cohort studies and nine systematic reviews. In the two studies that reported on surgical complications, no serious complications were reported. Pathological changes due to retention of asymptomatic impacted mandibular third molars were reported by three studies. In these studies, the extraction rate for retained impacted mandibular third molars varied from 5.5% to 31.4%; this variation can be explained by the differing follow-up periods (i.e. 1 and 5 years). The findings from this review are consistent with the findings from previous systematic reviews. Two published cost-effectiveness studies were identified. The authors of both studies concluded that, to their knowledge, there is currently no economic evidence to support the prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The results generated by the assessment group's lifetime economic model indicated that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year gained for the comparison of a prophylactic removal strategy with a retention and standard care strategy is £11,741 for people aged 20 years with asymptomatic impacted mandibular third molars. The incremental cost per person associated with prophylactic extraction is £55.71, with an incremental quality-adjusted life-year gain of 0.005 per person. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year gained was found to be robust when a range of sensitivity and scenario analyses were carried out.
LIMITATIONS
Limitations of the study included that no head-to-head trials comparing the effectiveness of prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molars with retention and standard care were identified with the assessment group model that was built on observational data. Utility data on impacted mandibular third molars and their symptoms are lacking.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence comparing the prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molars with retention and standard care is very limited. However, the results from an exploratory assessment group model, which uses available evidence on symptom development and extraction rates of retained impacted mandibular third molars, suggest that prophylactic removal may be the more cost-effective strategy.
FUTURE WORK
Effectiveness evidence is lacking. Head-to-head trials comparing the prophylactic removal of trouble-free impacted mandibular third molars with retention and watchful waiting are required. If this is not possible, routine clinical data, using common definitions and outcome reporting methods, should be collected.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016037776.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 24, No. 30. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Molar, Third; Treatment Outcome; United Kingdom
PubMed: 32589125
DOI: 10.3310/hta24300 -
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation Oct 2023Tooth wear (TW) prevalence is high and increasing and has important consequences on the patient's quality of life. Knowledge of risk factors is crucial to promote... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Tooth wear (TW) prevalence is high and increasing and has important consequences on the patient's quality of life. Knowledge of risk factors is crucial to promote diagnosis, prevention strategies and timely interceptive treatment. Many studies have identified TW risk factors.
OBJECTIVE
This scoping review aims to map and describe suspected available factors associated with TW in permanent dentition based on quantitative measurement.
METHODS
The scoping review was conducted using the PRISMA extension of the Scoping Reviews checklist. The search was conducted in October 2022 from the Medline® (PubMed® interface) and Scopus® databases. Two independent reviewers selected and characterised the studies.
RESULTS
2702 articles were identified for assessment of titles and abstracts, and 273 articles were included in the review. The results show a need to standardise TW measurement indices and the study design. The included studies highlighted various factors, classified into nine domains: sociodemographic factors, medical history, drinking habits, eating habits, oral hygiene habits, dental factors, bruxism and temporomandibular disorders, behavioural factors, and stress. Results related to chemical TW (erosion) risk factors underline the importance of eating disorders, gastroesophageal reflux and lifestyle, particularly drinking and eating behaviours, which supports developing public health information campaigns and interventions. Besides chemical, this review identifies evidence of several mechanical TW risk factors, such as toothbrushing and bruxism; the influence of this last factor needs to be further explored.
CONCLUSIONS
TW management and prevention require a multidisciplinary approach. Dentists are in the first line to detect associated diseases such as reflux or eating disorders. Consequently, practitioners' information and guideline diffusion should be promoted, and a TW risk factors checklist (the ToWeR checklist) is proposed to help diagnostic approaches.
Topics: Humans; Bruxism; Dentition, Permanent; Tooth Erosion; Quality of Life; Tooth Wear; Tooth Attrition; Risk Factors; Gastroesophageal Reflux
PubMed: 37147932
DOI: 10.1111/joor.13489 -
Journal of Dentistry Nov 2023To identify the prevalence of Awake Bruxism (AB). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To identify the prevalence of Awake Bruxism (AB).
SOURCES
The electronic search was done in Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, LILACS, Livivo, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to January 2nd, 2023. The search strategies combined terms such as "bruxism," "awake," and related terms when conducting searches in databases. Grey literature was consulted through Google Scholar, ProQuest, and OpenGrey.
STUDY SELECTION
Two independent reviewers participated in the study selection stages and included observational studies assessing the prevalence of AB, detected using reporting feedback (self or family report), clinical examination, and/or instrumental methods, regardless of the sex and age of the population.
DATA
Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's checklist for prevalence studies. Ratio meta-analyses were performed using R Statistics software.
RESULTS
From a total of 3,083 studies identified by the searches on databases, 322 articles were reviewed the full-text and a total of 81 (quantitative synthesis) and 83 (narrative synthesis) studies were included. Only fifteen studies reached complete methodological quality. Two overall meta-analyses were performed, grouped based on convenience and population-based samples. The overall prevalence for possible AB was 32.08 % and 16.16 %, respectively. For the subgroup analyses, the prevalence rate showed a wide variation in different studied populations, approximately 14 %-32 % for women and 19 %-30 % for men, for population-based and convenience studies, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Possible AB prevalence was set from 16 % to 32 %. Studies with probable AB and definitive AB are still necessary.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Studying the prevalence of waking bruxism is of interest to both dentists and patients. Knowing the probability of patients having awake bruxism allows the dentist to offer comprehensive preventive approaches to patients, avoiding deleterious consequences resulting from this condition. The present study reveals that the condition of bruxism during wakefulness is present in one out of every six adult patients studied. In pediatric patients, although this condition seems to be equally present, not enough studies were found to support this information for probable and definitive bruxism.
Topics: Male; Adult; Humans; Female; Child; Bruxism; Wakefulness; Prevalence
PubMed: 37739056
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104715 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jan 2023The aim of this study was o determine the relationship between sleep bruxism (SB) and sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (SAHS) at the pathophysiological level, the risk... (Review)
Review
The aim of this study was o determine the relationship between sleep bruxism (SB) and sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (SAHS) at the pathophysiological level, the risk factors, as well as the common signs and symptoms. A search was carried out using the databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library together with the Boolean equation "bruxism" AND "sleep apnea" AND "relation*"; the systematic search strategy limited the results to English language articles published from 2013 until December 2021. This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Nine articles were reviewed to relate SAHS and SB at different levels: two were systematic reviews (22%) and seven were research studies (78%). According to the literature reviewed, SB and SAHS occur simultaneously in 21.0% to 41.3% of cases. There are signs and symptoms that are common to both SAHS and SB. Rhythmic masticatory muscle activity (RMMA) precedes an SAHS event in 25% of subjects with SB, in contrast to 55% of the general population. SB and SAHS seem to have a certain concomitance, ranging between 20% and 40%, and they also share some risk factors such as advanced age, obesity, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Dentists should be aware of this relationship, as part of a multidisciplinary team, for early diagnosis.
PubMed: 36769558
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12030910