Results in Journal British Dental Journal: 34,225
(searched for: journal_id:(34542))
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 309-309; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3438-5
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 307-307; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3436-7
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 299-299; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3454-5
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 309-309; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3440-y
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 272-272; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3459-0
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 298-298; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3431-z
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 307-307; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3421-1
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 301-301; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3428-7
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 301-301; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3429-6
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 275-275; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3463-4
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 271-271; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3432-y
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 303-304; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3376-2
This article looks at some of the issues around providing and receiving dental care for autistic children and adults in the shadow of COVID-19 and suggests management approaches. COVID-19 represents yet another barrier to accessing dental care for some individuals with ASD.Dental professionals need to specifically ask families at recall about how the pandemic has,and continues to affect the individual concerned. Dental management may consequently need to be adapted to reflect this information.
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 301-301; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3422-0
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 298-298; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3455-4
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 312-312; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3450-9
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 275-275; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3462-5
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 301-301; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3430-0
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 311-311; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3446-5
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 311-311; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3444-7
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 273-274; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3461-6
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 309-309; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3439-4
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 261-263; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3425-x
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 267-267; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3433-x
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 300-300; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3452-7
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 267-267; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3426-9
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 272-272; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3460-7
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 311-311; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3445-6
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 312-312; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3449-2
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 299-299; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3453-6
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 264-265; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3403-3
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 312-312; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3447-4
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 310-310; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3441-x
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 276-276; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3464-3
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 265-266; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3402-4
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 267-268; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3434-9
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 312-312; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3448-3
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 271-271; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3458-1
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 287-293; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3336-x
Adhesive indirect restorations are a popular restorative treatment option. This article discusses the many factors that contribute to their successful adhesive cementation, including a review of how to surface treat and manage contaminants across the wide range of indirect materials available.
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 310-310; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3443-8
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 268-268; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3435-8
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 307-307; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3437-6
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 310-310; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3442-9
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 281-286; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3333-0
Multiple sclerosis affects approximately 130,000 people in the UK. Due to the wide variation in the symptoms associated with this condition and their variable severity, the provision of dental care for affected patients must be determined by an individual's specific needs. This will often vary significantly over time. This paper reviews the aetiology, presentation and current management of multiple sclerosis, and explores the impact of these on oral health and the provision of dental care.
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 277-280; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3335-y
Oral diseases such as dental caries (DC) and periodontitis are widely prevalent, and existing approaches to managing these conditions have only a limited effect. Accordingly, there is growing interest in the development of novel biological interventions (including, among others, CRISPR-Cas9) that might, in the future, be used to prevent the development of or cure these conditions. However, in addition to familiar concerns about using biological interventions in children who cannot provide valid consent, it is not clear whether the provision of these interventions would fall within the proper domain of dentistry. In this opinion paper, we defend the view that the provision of reasonably safe and effective novel biological interventions aimed at preventing DC and periodontitis should be understood to fall within the proper domain of dentistry. To do so, we first argue that their use would be consistent with existing practice in dentistry. We then argue that: i) they may substantially increase the recipient's wellbeing and future autonomy; and ii) that their use could constitute a form of indirect preventative medicine by addressing a threat to systemic health.
British Dental Journal, Volume 231, pp 308-308; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3451-8
British Dental Journal pp 1-6; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3329-9
Background Amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) is a genetic enamel defect that can affect both the primary and permanent dentition. It has a range of clinical phenotypes, and children and young people often present with challenging oral health needs. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can identify key patient concerns. Methods This was a multi-centre service evaluation across several specialist paediatric dentistry services in the UK. A PROM questionnaire was created with clinician and patient input, through peer review with the national AI Clinical Excellence Network, as well as piloting the PROM with ten children and young people with AI. The final PROM questionnaire was distributed to all patients with AI attending each unit between January and March 2020. Results Sixty children and young people (aged 5-17 years) across four specialist units participated, with 72% reporting that they 'often' or 'sometimes' experienced pain or sensitivity and 76% reporting that they 'often' or 'sometimes' felt unhappy with the way their teeth look. Of the patients who were post-treatment, 81% indicated that they were happy with their teeth, compared to just 41% of patients who were mid-treatment and 33% of patients who were pre-treatment. Conclusion Children and young people with AI experience a range of issues related to their function and psychosocial wellbeing. This simple PROM demonstrates the range of issues this group of patients face, and could be used to monitor an individual's progress to ensure that treatment is planned to address the patient's individual concerns and needs.
British Dental Journal pp 1-5; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3379-z
Introduction Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, from 23 March 2020, routine dental treatment was stopped by the Chief Dental Officer, with the emphasis towards urgent dental care only. Aim To evaluate the activities of the emergency service at a secondary care Urgent Dental Care (UDC) hub during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods The total number of patients seen from 30 March to 20 June 2020 was recorded. The effectiveness of telephone triage and the appropriateness of patients invited for a clinical assessment were evaluated over a two-week period. Results The number of calls into the UDC hub were highest during the first few weeks, with up to 249 per day. The most commonly provided emergency treatments included extractions and pulp extirpations. Discussion As other UDC hubs opened, the number of calls reduced, with patients being directed to a UDC nearer to where they lived. Conclusions The dental profession had to make some significant changes in the way they worked due to the risk of COVID-19 transmission and due to the effects of the lockdown. This review highlights the effectiveness of telephone triage as well as its drawbacks.
British Dental Journal pp 1-5; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3330-3
Aim To identify glove usage within UK and Ireland dental hospitals as well as the use of latex- and non-latex-containing dental equipment. Method A self-completed questionnaire was disseminated to 16 dental hospitals in the summer of 2017. The survey concerned their current use of latex and non-latex gloves and dental equipment. In addition, information was sought regarding any problems associated with non-latex and latex gloves. Results The questionnaire response rate was 13/16 (81%), of which 100% reported the use of non-latex examination gloves. The majority were using nitrile gloves. Twelve of the 13 dental hospitals would use examination gloves for simple extractions and 11 would use sterile gloves for minor oral surgery. In ten hospitals (77%), the sterile gloves were always non-latex, and again, the majority were nitrile. Latex-containing dental equipment including orthodontic bands, prophylactic polishing cups and dental dam was still being used within some dental hospitals, but to a much lesser extent than non-latex. Conclusion All dental hospitals were using latex-free examination gloves and were showing a move towards latex-free dental equipment. This usage is comparable to what has been seen in general dental practice and follows the trend towards latex-free dentistry.
British Dental Journal pp 1-10; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3375-3
Introduction Following the World Health Organisation declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic, routine dental care in the UK ceased, and Urgent Dental Care centres (UDCs) were established to offer remote and face-to-face urgent dental treatment for those in need. Aim To explore perceptions and psychosocial experiences of frontline staff providing care at UDCs in England during COVID-19. Method A qualitative research study using a phenomenological approach. Semi-structured interviews were conducted remotely. Using line-by-line coding, data were analysed using a hybrid approach that incorporated both a deductive, theoretical process and an inductive, data-driven process. Results Participants included 29 dentists and nine dental nurses from UDCs across England. Twelve themes were identified and grouped into positive and negative experiences. Positive experiences were: role fulfilment and having a sense of purpose; team unity and collective coping strategies; and strategic teamwork and preparedness for effective organisation of care. Negative experiences included: feeling undervalued and frustrated due to fragmented guidance and communication; sense of unfairness generated by relational challenges; patient demand outstripping UDC capacity; complex decision-making; uncertainty over safety; suffocating PPE hindering effective communication; ineffective communication channels across healthcare sectors; lack of commitment to remote video consultations; and variable referral quality. Conclusions Participants reported experiencing a number of emotional challenges that appeared to be exacerbated by an unsupportive environment, often due to lack of leadership. However, positive experiences and coping strategies were also identified. Collective and sustained efforts at system level to improve the resilience and mental wellbeing of the current and future dental workforce and integration of dentistry into wider healthcare infrastructures are needed.