International journal of dental hygiene最新文献

Aim: To evaluate an interprofessional learning (IPL) session involving dental hygiene students and nursing students and to investigate the nursing students' oral health-related knowledge and attitudes.

Material and method: First, a questionnaire about knowledge and attitudes regarding oral health was answered by 84 nursing students. After an IPL session, including dental hygiene students and nursing students, both groups completed an evaluation questionnaire.

Results: Both student groups stated that the IPL had led to an increased understanding of each other's professional roles and the importance of collaboration. Among the nursing students, 67.9% rated their knowledge about oral health as good/fairly good. Only 15.5% rated their knowledge about gum diseases as good/fairly good and 44% their knowledge about caries as good/fairly good. Additionally, 48.8% fully agreed/agreed that they felt secure performing oral care on care recipients. The nursing students had received little or no oral health-related education.

Conclusion: For nursing students, the IPL has led to an increased understanding of how oral diseases can be detected, prevented and treated. For the dental hygiene students, the IPL session has led to an improved capability to discuss oral health and oral care with another profession and to a better understanding of the nurse's role regarding oral healthcare. Both student groups have increased their awareness of the importance of future interprofessional collaboration. IPL about oral health and oral care should be integrated more broadly into dental hygiene and nursing education.

The evidence base supporting a bidirectional relationship between diabetes and periodontitis is well-established and published guidance recommends inter-professional management. This two-case study describes the development and implementation of an evidence-based oral health intervention delivered in diabetes review consultations in NHS primary medical care in Northeast England.

Aim: The intervention aim was to inform people with diabetes about the links between diabetes and periodontitis, and signpost them to a dental professional for assessment.

Methods: The study utilised focus groups in the design phase and a mixture of focus groups and interviews in the evaluation phase.

Results: Two research active primary care medical practices were recruited. The interventions were informed by their diabetes management protocols to reduce disruption. The interventions were piloted for 2 months, and staff and patient perceptions were evaluated. The findings from this study suggested that the oral health interventions were feasible and acceptable particularly for nurses and health care assistants when delivering diabetes education, but they caused disruption to the GPs review, which included complex medication reviews and referrals. The patients (n = 2) found the intervention to be acceptable and appropriate in the context of their diabetes review.

Conclusion: Medical staff and patient evaluation data appear to suggest acceptance of the introduction of an oral health intervention into the diabetes review, but it is difficult to assess the impact of the intervention. Further research, such as a realist review, is needed to evaluate the outcomes and utility of an oral health intervention in the context of the medical management of diabetes in primary care.

Introduction: This randomised, single-blind, controlled study aimed to compare daily adjunctive use of an ultrasonic water irrigation device to dental floss in controlling plaque and gingival inflammation in patients with gingivitis.

Methods: Participants were randomly allocated to either daily use of an ultrasonic water irrigator or dental floss as an adjunct to manual toothbrushing for 4 weeks, with periodontal assessment repeated at 1 and 4 weeks after baseline (Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index [PI], Loe and Silness Gingival Index [GI] and bleeding on marginal probing [BOMP]).

Results: Sixty-two participants completed the investigation. Statistically significant reductions in total and marginal PI at Weeks 1 and 4 were noted in both groups compared to baseline (p < 0.05) with no significant differences between groups. BOMP and GI scores were likewise significantly reduced in both groups at Weeks 1 and 4 compared to baseline (p < 0.01). However, at Week 4, those using the ultrasonic water irrigator showed a significantly greater reduction in GI scores when compared to the floss group (-0.35 ± 0.26 vs. -0.16 ± 0.25, respectively, p < 0.01) and a significantly greater reduction in BOMP scores when compared to floss (-0.26 ± 0.12 vs. -0.15 ± 0.15, respectively, p < 0.01). Those using the ultrasonic water irrigator also reported easier usage scores (p < 0.05) when compared to the floss group.

Conclusion: Daily use of the ultrasonic water irrigator resulted in significantly greater reductions in gingival inflammation (gingival index and BOMP) than dental floss after 4 weeks, whereas plaque removal was similarly effective using the irrigator or floss.

Introduction: The plasminogen activating (PA) system has a multitude of functions such as wound healing, proteolytic activity, collagen degradation and cell growth, and the role of the urokinase plasminogen activator/urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPA/uPAR) system has been studied in many disease states. The aim of this study was to investigate salivary concentrations of uPA, uPAR and uPA activity in patients with periodontitis to identify biomarkers and novel pathogenic relationships.

Methods: Saliva samples were obtained from 169 participants, comprising patients with periodontitis (n = 103) and periodontally healthy volunteers (n = 66) and analysed for uPA and uPAR with a multiplex protein assay using proximity extension analysis in a subset of samples, followed by validation with ELISA. The protease activity of salivary uPA was quantified using a fluorometric assay.

Results: Patients with periodontitis had a 4.0-fold higher (p < 0.001) salivary uPA and a 2.5-fold higher (p < 0.001) salivary uPAR concentration in comparison to periodontally healthy participants. The salivary uPA activity (median [IQR]) from patients with periodontitis (123.21 [188.29] U/mL) was 1.6-fold higher (p < 0.01) than the salivary uPA activity from periodontally healthy participants (76.83 [98.09] U/mL). Levels of uPA and uPAR were strongly correlated with periodontal indices, whereas only weak correlations were found with BMI and age.

Conclusion: Activation of uPA/uPAR likely plays a role in the pathogenesis of periodontal diseases. uPA/uPAR may have potential utility as candidate salivary biomarkers in periodontal pathogenesis.