Is access to paediatric dental general anaesthesia by need or by postcode?

Children's oral health, and the number of children attending for dental treatment under general anaesthesia continue to be in the spotlight of the dental press. But are all children across the UK given the same opportunities to access comprehensive dental care under general anaesthesia? This article gives details of a recent evaluation of dental general anaesthetic services currently provided in the UK. It outlines the current picture of services, discusses the challenges and the implications of the results, and makes suggestions to help improve the regional inequalities shown by the evaluation

Vital bleaching for children with dental anomalies: EAPD members’ survey

AIM Understand EAPD members’ practices of vital bleaching for children with dental anomalies. METHODS An anonymous online survey sent via EAPD in January 2019, consisting of 13 questions with possible multiple answers and free text. RESULTS 110 responses from 24 countries were obtained. The majority worked in hospitals/universities (n = 69, 63%) or private practices (n = 50, 46%) and were specialists (n = 62, 57%) or senior academics (n = 35, 32%). Most respondents (n = 74 68%) did not provide vital bleaching for children. 88 respondents (80%) belonged to EU: of these, 46 (52%) were not aware of bleaching regulations. For respondents who provided bleaching 26 (72%) undertook home bleaching, using 10% carbamide peroxide (n = 21, 58%), most commonly for 2 weeks (n = 14, 39%), following establishment of the permanent dentition (n = 21, 58%). Deciding factors included: extent (n = 27, 75%) and shade (n = 26, 72%) of discolouration and child being teased by peers (n = 23, 64%). Main reasons for not bleaching included: concerns with side effects (n = 41; 55%) and not agreeing with bleaching (n = 23, 31%). Dentists who did not bleach managed a range of conditions, most frequently molar-incisor hypomineralisation (n = 57; 77%). The majority provided composite restorations with removal of tooth structure (n = 50; 68%) with a number opting for no treatment (n = 27, 37%). CONCLUSION This study shows wide variations in treatment of children’s dental anomalies across Europe. Fears of adverse effects and personal beliefs seemed to be the main deterrents to bleaching in children. Clinicians who provided bleaching tended to opt for more conservative techniques and to take children’s concerns into consideration

Techniques for effective local anaesthetic administration for the paediatric patient

Local anaesthesia forms the backbone of pain control techniques in dentistry and has a major role in dentistry for children and adults alike. Dental anxiety is still prevalent among children, causing delays in seeking dental care and leading to increased rates in childhood caries, resulting in increased hospital admissions for dental care under general anaesthesia. There is a constant search for more comfortable means of achieving local anaesthesia to provide a more positive experience for paediatric patients when seeking dental treatment. This article aims to provide an overview of local anaesthetic techniques used in paediatric dentistry, as well as methods utilised to make local anaesthetic administration more comfortable and how to increase acceptability

Poly(propylene glycol) and urethane dimethacrylates improve conversion of dental composites and reveal complexity of cytocompatibility testing.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of various monomers on conversion and cytocompatibility of dental composites and to improve these properties without detrimentally affecting mechanical properties, depth of cure and shrinkage. METHODS: Composites containing urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA) or bisphenol A glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA) with poly(propylene glycol) dimethacrylate (PPGDMA) or triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA) were characterized using the following techniques: conversion (FTIR at 1 and 4mm depths), depth of cure (BS EN ISO 4049:2009 and FTIR), shrinkage (BS EN ISO 17304:2013 and FTIR), strength and modulus (biaxial flexural test) and water sorption. Cytocompatibility of composites and their liquid phase components was assessed using three assays (resazurin, WST-8 and MTS). RESULTS: UDMA significantly improved conversion, BFS and depth of cure compared to Bis-GMA, without increasing shrinkage. UDMA was cytotoxic at lower concentrations than Bis-GMA, but extracts of Bis-GMA-containing composites were less cytocompatible than of those containing UDMA. PPGDMA improved conversion and depth of cure compared to TEGDMA, without detrimentally affecting shrinkage. TEGDMA was shown by all assays to be highly toxic. Resazurin, but not WST-8 and MTS, suggested that PPGDMA exhibited improved cytocompatibility compared to TEGDMA. SIGNIFICANCE: The use of UDMA and PPGDMA results in composites with excellent conversion, depth of cure and mechanical properties, without increasing shrinkage. Composites containing UDMA appear to be slightly more cytocompatible than those containing Bis-GMA. These monomers may therefore improve the material properties of dental restorations, particularly bulk fill materials. The effect of diluent monomer on cytocompatibility requires further investigation

Interventions for increasing acceptance of local anaesthetic in children and adolescents having dental treatment

BACKGROUND: Delivery of pain-free dentistry is crucial for reducing fear and anxiety, completion of treatment, and increasing acceptance of future dental treatment in children. Local anaesthetic (LA) facilitates this pain-free approach but it remains challenging. A number of interventions to help children cope with delivery of LA have been described, with no consensus on the best method to increase its acceptance. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of methods for acceptance of LA in children and adolescents during dental treatment. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 24 May 2019); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019 Issue 4) in the Cochrane Library (searched 24 May 2019); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 24 of May 2019); Embase Ovid (1980 to 24 May 2019); and Web of Science (1900 to 24 May 2019). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also searched to 24 May 2019. There were no restrictions on language or date of publications. SELECTION CRITERIA: Parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions used to increase acceptance of dental LA in children and adolescents under the age of 18 years. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We performed data extraction and assessment of risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We contacted authors for missing information. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 26 trials with 2435 randomised participants aged between 2 and 16 years. Studies were carried out between 2002 and 2019 in dental clinics in the UK, USA, the Netherlands, Iran, India, France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Mexico, and Korea. Studies included equipment interventions (using several LA delivery devices for injection or audiovisual aids used immediately prior to or during LA delivery or both) and dentist interventions (psychological behaviour interventions delivered in advance of LA (video modelling), or immediately prior to or during delivery of LA or both (hypnosis, counter-stimulation). We judged one study to be at low risk and the rest at high risk of bias. Clinical heterogeneity of the included studies rendered it impossible to pool data into meta-analyses. None of the studies reported on our primary outcome of acceptance of LA. No studies reported on the following secondary outcomes: completion of dental treatment, successful LA/painless treatment, patient satisfaction, parent satisfaction, and adverse events. Audiovisual distraction compared to conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain for the outcome pain-related behaviour during delivery of LA with a reduction in negative behaviour when 3D video glasses where used in the audiovisual distraction group (risk ratio (RR) 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.50; 1 trial, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The wand versus conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain regarding the effect of the wand on pain-related behaviour during delivery of LA. Four studies reported a benefit in using the wand while the remaining studies results suggested no difference between the two methods of delivering LA (six trials, 704 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Counter-stimulation/distraction versus conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain for the outcome pain experience during delivery of LA with children experiencing less pain when counter-stimulation was used (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.34; 1 trial, 134 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Hypnosis versus conventional treatment: the evidence was uncertain for the outcome pain experience during delivery of LA with participants in the hypnosis group experiencing less pain (mean difference (MD) -1.79, 95% CI -3.01 to -0.57; 1 trial, 29 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Other comparisons considered included pre-cooling of the injection site, the wand versus Sleeper One, the use of a camouflage syringe, use of an electrical counter-stimulation device, and video modelling acclimatisation, and had a single study each. The findings from these other comparisons were insufficient to draw any affirmative conclusions about their effectiveness, and were considered to be very low-certainty evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We did not find sufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions as to the best interventions to increase acceptance of LA in children due to variation in methodology and nature/timing of outcome measures. We recommend further parallel RCTs, reported in line with the CONSORT Statement. Care should be taken when choosing outcome measures

Early Polylysine Release from Dental Composites and Its Effects on Planktonic Streptococcus mutans Growth

The study aim was to assess the effect of incorporating polylysine (PLS) filler at different mass fractions (0.5, 1 and 2 wt%) on PLS release and Streptococcus mutans planktonic growth. Composite containing PLS mass and volume change and PLS release upon water immersion were assessed gravimetrically and via high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), respectively. Disc effects on bacterial counts in broth initially containing 8 × 10^{5} versus 8 × 10^{6} CFU/mL Streptococcus mutans UA159 were determined after 24 h. Survival of sedimented bacteria after 72 h was determined following LIVE/DEAD staining of composite surfaces using confocal microscopy. Water sorption-induced mass change at two months increased from 0.7 to 1.7% with increasing PLS concentration. Average volume increases were 2.3% at two months whilst polylysine release levelled at 4% at 3 weeks irrespective of composite PLS level. Early percentage PLS release, however, was faster with higher composite content. With 0.5, 1 and 2% polylysine initially in the composite filler phase, 24-h PLS release into 1 mL of water yielded 8, 25 and 93 ppm respectively. With initial bacterial counts of 8 × 10^{5} CFU/mL, this PLS release reduced 24-h bacterial counts from 10^{9} down to 10^{8}, 10^{7} and 10^{2} CFU/mL respectively. With a high initial inoculum, 24-h bacterial counts were 10^{9} with 0, 0.5 or 1% PLS and 10^{7} with 2% PLS. As the PLS composite content was raised, the ratio of dead to live sedimented bacteria increased. The antibacterial action of the experimental composites could reduce residual bacteria remaining following minimally invasive tooth restorations

Methods of space maintenance for premature loss of a primary molar: a review

AIM: This critical appraisal attempts to answer the question: What is the best method of space maintenance (SM) following premature loss of a primary molar in children under 12 years old? METHODS: A search to identify studies relevant to the PICO was conducted. Single case reports and studies prior to 1986 were excluded. The principles of GRADE were followed to appraise the evidence. RESULTS: 20 studies were identified, which evaluated 2265 space maintainers (SMs). Two studies were graded high quality, four moderate, eight low, and six very low. All studies reported on longevity outcomes and most on adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: There was no strong evidence favouring a particular SM, the following recommendations were made: (a) strong recommendations: In cases where rubber dam cannot be used clinicians should not use Glass Fibre Reinforced Composite Resin (GFRCR) SMs. (b) Weak recommendations: Crown and Loop SMs are recommended for loss of primary first molars; GFRCR SMs (placed under rubber dam) are recommended for loss of primary second molars. Bilateral SMs may have questionable efficacy and their use where there is loss of multiple molars in the same quadrant should be weighed against the risk of unwanted tooth movements, loss of a removable SM or no space maintenance at all

Intraoperative local anaesthesia for reduction of postoperative pain following general anaesthesia for dental treatment in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND: Whilst carrying out dental procedures under general anaesthesia (GA), practitioners routinely give local anaesthetics (LA) intraoperatively to children. Local anaesthetics are used to help manage postoperative pain and reduce bleeding and the physiological response to procedures. Studies of effectiveness of intraoperative LA to date have reported contradictory results. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intraoperative local anaesthesia for reducing postoperative pain following general anaesthesia for dental treatment in children and young people aged 17 years or younger. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2013, Issue 12), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 02 January 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 02 January 2014) and Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 02 January 2014). We searched for ongoing trials in the US National Institutes of Health Register, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) Clinical Trials Portal. We did not place any restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in which local anaesthetic was given intraoperatively under general anaesthesia for dental treatment of children and young people aged 17 years or younger. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We performed data extraction and assessment of risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We contacted authors to clarify omissions in trial reports. In the 'Summary of findings' tables, we elected to report the outcomes pain, distress, postoperative bleeding, and physiological parameters related to the general anaesthetic, as we considered these to be the outcomes of greatest importance to readers of the review. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 trials in this review, with 1152 randomised participants. The studies were published between 1990 and 2009 and were conducted in the United Kingdom, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. The age of participants ranged from 2 to 40 years. Three studies were at an overall high risk of bias, seven studies were at an unclear risk of bias, and we judged four studies to be at low risk of bias. The clinical heterogeneity of the included studies precluded pooling of studies in terms of method of administration of LA (e.g., intraligamental injection, infiltration injection, or topical delivery) and variation in the use of supplementary analgesics and follow‐up time. Of the seven studies where administration of LA was by infiltration injection, six studies (very low‐quality body of evidence, 542 participants analysed, 1 study had overall high risk of bias, 4 studies had overall unclear risk of bias, 1 study had overall low risk of bias) measured postoperative pain. The results were equivocal. There was a decrease in bleeding and increase in soft tissue damage in the LA groups, but we did not judge this to be clinically significant. In the 2 studies where administration of LA was by intraligamental injection, there was no difference in mean pain scores, and they did not report any soft tissue damage (very low‐quality body of evidence, 115 participants analysed, 1 study had overall high risk of bias, 1 study had overall unclear risk of bias). One 3‐armed study (very low‐quality body of evidence, 54 participants analysed, overall high risk of bias) compared the effects of intraligamental and infiltration LA injection with no treatment. There was no evidence of a mean difference in pain, distress, or postoperative anxiety among the three groups. Four studies (very low‐quality body of evidence, 343 participants analysed, 2 studies had overall low risk of bias, 2 studies had overall unclear risk of bias) evaluated the effects of topical LA compared with no treatment or placebo. One study (overall unclear risk of bias) with a no‐treatment comparator reported lower mean pain in the LA group; all other studies reported no difference in mean pain scores. Two studies reported on bleeding (overall unclear risk of bias): One study reported a clinically insignificant increase in bleeding with no treatment; the other reported no difference. None of the studies reported on participant or child satisfaction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In this review, it was difficult to reach firm conclusions as to the benefit of using local anaesthetic for dental treatment under general anaesthesia. The information reported in the included studies was comprehensive and applicable to the review question, but ultimately it was not sufficient to address the objective of the review. We were unable to pool the included studies in a meta‐analysis because of substantial variation in outcome measures, interventions, and treatment types. The use of supplementary analgesia further obscured the effect of local anaesthetics. Based on the literature review and the results of this review, we recommend further randomised controlled trials that minimise bias through adequate allocation concealment and blinding of participants and assessors, and assess the effect of intraoperative local anaesthetic on the volume and type of anaesthetic used and on the cardiovascular system in participants receiving supplementary analgesics as well. Researchers should give consideration to the impact of any changes on the health and well‐being of the participant and report baseline measures of pain or distress, or both, and preoperative anxiety

Safety and Efficacy of Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine in Falciparum Malaria: A Prospective Multi-Centre Individual Patient Data Analysis

BACKGROUND: The fixed dose antimalarial combination of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) is a promising new artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). We present an individual patient data analysis of efficacy and tolerability in acute uncomplicated falciparum malaria, from seven published randomized clinical trials conducted in Africa and South East Asia using a predefined in-vivo protocol. Comparator drugs were mefloquine-artesunate (MAS3) in Thailand, Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia; artemether-lumefantrine in Uganda; and amodiaquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and artesunate+amodiaquine in Rwanda. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In total 3,547 patients were enrolled: 1,814 patients (32% children under five years) received DP and 1,733 received a comparator antimalarial at 12 different sites and were followed for 28-63 days. There was no significant heterogeneity between trials. DP was well tolerated with 1.7% early vomiting. There were less adverse events with DP in children and adults compared to MAS3 except for diarrhea; ORs (95%CI) 2.74 (2.13 to 3.51) and 3.11 (2.31 to 4.18), respectively. DP treatment resulted in a rapid clearance of fever and parasitaemia. The PCR genotype corrected efficacy at Day 28 of DP assessed by survival analysis was 98.7% (95%CI 97.6-99.8). DP was superior to the comparator drugs in protecting against both P.falciparum recurrence and recrudescence (P = 0.001, weighted by site). There was no difference between DP and MAS3 in treating P. vivax co-infections and in suppressing the first relapse (median interval to P. vivax recurrence: 6 weeks). Children under 5 y were at higher risk of recurrence for both infections. The proportion of patients developing gametocytaemia (P = 0.002, weighted by site) and the subsequent gametocyte carriage rates were higher with DP (11/1000 person gametocyte week, PGW) than MAS3 (6/1000 PGW, P = 0.001, weighted by site). CONCLUSIONS: DP proved a safe, well tolerated, and highly effective treatment of P.falciparum malaria in Asia and Africa, but the effect on gametocyte carriage was inferior to that of MAS3

Multicentric assessment of the efficacy and tolerability of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine compared to artemether-lumefantrine in the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in sub-Saharan Africa

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The choice of appropriate artemisinin-based combination therapy depends on several factors (cost, efficacy, safety, reinfection rate and simplicity of administration). To assess whether the combination dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) could be an alternative to artemether-lumefantrine (AL), the efficacy and the tolerability of the two products for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in sub-Saharan Africa have been compared.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A multicentric open randomized controlled clinical trial of three-day treatment of DP against AL for the treatment of two parallel groups of patients aged two years and above and suffering from uncomplicated falciparum malaria was carried out in Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire and Senegal. Within each group, patients were randomly assigned supervised treatment. DP was given once a day for three days and AL twice a day for three days. Follow-up visits were performed on day 1 to 4 and on day 7, 14, 21, 28 to evaluate clinical and parasitological results. The primary endpoint was the recovery rate by day 28.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 384 patients enrolled, 197 were assigned DP and 187 AL. The recovery rates adjusted by genotyping, 99.5% in the DP group and 98.9% in the AL group, were not statistically different (p = 0.538). No Early Therapeutic Failure (ETF) was observed. At day 28, two patients in the DP group and five in AL group had recurrent parasitaemia with <it>Plasmodium falciparum</it>. In the DP group, after PCR genotyping, one of the two recurrences was classified as a new infection and the other as recrudescence. In AL group, two recurrences were classified after correction by PCR as recrudescence. All cases of recrudescence were classified as Late Parasitological Failure (LPF). In each group, a rapid recovery from fever and parasitaemia was noticed. More than 90% of patients did no longer present fever or parasitaemia 48 hours after treatment. Both drugs were well tolerated. Indeed, no serious adverse events were reported during the follow-up period. Most of the adverse events which developed were moderate and did not result in the treatment being stopped in either treatment group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was as effective and well-tolerated as artemether-lumefantrine in the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria. In addition, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, a single daily dose, could be an advantage over artemether-lumefantrine in Africa because of better treatment observance.</p