Identifying Factors to Improve Oral Cancer Screening Uptake: A Qualitative Study

Aims: To engage with high risk groups to identify knowledge and awareness of oral cancer signs and symptoms and the factors likely to contribute to improved screening uptake. Methods: Focus group discussions were undertaken with 18 males; 40+ years of age; smokers and/or drinkers (15+ cigarettes per day and/or 15+ units of alcohol per week), irregular dental attenders living in economically deprived areas of Teesside. Results: There was a striking reported lack of knowledge and awareness of oral cancer and its signs and symptoms among the participants. When oral/mouth cancer leaflets produced by Cancer Research UK were presented to the participants, they claimed that they would seek help on noticing such a condition. There was a preference to seek help from their general practitioner rather than their dentist due to perceptions that a dentist is ‘inaccessible ’ on a physical and psychological level, costly, a ‘tooth specialist ’ not a ‘mouth specialist’, and also not able to prescribe medication and make referrals to specialists. Interestingly, none of the 18 participants who were offered a free oral cancer examination at a dental practice took up this offer. Conclusions: The uptake of oral cancer screening may be improved by increasing knowledge of the existence and signs and symptoms of oral cancer. Other factors that may increase uptake are increased awareness of the role of dentists in diagnosing oral cancer, promotion of oral cancer screening by health professionals during routine health checks, and the use of a ‘‘health’ ’ screening setting as opposed to a ‘‘dental’ ’ setting for such checks

Self – perceived and clinically diagnosed dental and periodontal health status among young adults and their implications for epidemiological surveys

BACKGROUND: Clinical (normative) and subjective (self-assessment) evaluation of caries and periodontal diseases have been reported to demonstrate a significant disparity. The dental public health team is obligated to recognize and understand this gap. The objectives of the study were to investigate the practical values of using questionnaires (self–perceived assessment) as compared to clinical examinations (normative assessment) and to evaluate the implications of the results in understanding the public's perception of oral health. METHODS: The investigation was performed on 4920, 21 year-old Israeli adults upon release from compulsory military service between 1996 and 1998. Participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire inquiring how they would rate their personal dental and periodontal health levels. Clinical examinations, employing the DMFT and CPITN indices, were performed to determine normative oral health status. Perceived and normative assessments were compared for sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and overall proportions using the clinical examinations as a gold standard. RESULTS: The sensitivity (disease perception) for dental status was found to be 0.34, while the specificity (health perception) was found to be 0.83. The positive predictive value for perceived dental status was found to be 0.68, whereas the negative predictive value was found to be 0.54. The sensitivity for perceived periodontal status was found to be 0.28, while the specificity was found to be 0.83. The positive predictive value for perceived periodontal status was found to be 0.05, whereas the negative predictive value was found to be 0.97. Regarding the overall proportions, a large discrepancy was found between self–assessment and professional assessment for both dental and periodontal health status. CONCLUSIONS: Self-assessment questionnaires were of low value in evaluating oral health status both in the individual and public levels, though perception levels of health were higher than that of disease. Findings reflects a low level of awareness of the public that may influence care-seeking behavior and highlight the importance of oral health promotion and the crucial need for public health action

Oral cancer treatment costs in Greece and the effect of advanced disease

BACKGROUND: The main purpose of the study was to quantify the direct costs of oral cancer treatment to the healthcare system of Greece. Another aim was to identify factors that affect costs and potential cost reduction items. More specifically, we examined the relationship between stage of disease, modality of treatment and total direct costs. METHODS: The medical records and clinic files of the Oral and Maxillofacial Clinic of the Athens General Hospital "Genimatas" were abstracted to investigate clinical treatment characteristics, including length of hospitalization, modes of treatment, stage of disease etc. Records of 95 patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSSC), with at least six months of follow-up, were examined. The clinical data was then used to calculate actual direct costs, based on 2001 market values. RESULTS: The mean total direct costs for OSSC treatment estimated at euro 8,450 or approximately US$ 7,450. Costs depended on the stage of the disease, with significant increases in stages III and IV, as compared with stages I and II (p < 0.05). Multi-modality treatment applied mainly to patients in stages III and IV was the factor that affected the cost. Disease stage was also associated with the total duration of hospitalization (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical management of advanced oral cancer is strongly associated with higher costs. Although the ideal would be to prevent cancer, the combination of high-risk screening, early diagnosis and early treatment seems the most efficient way to reduce costs, and most importantly, prolong life

Validation of a multifactorial risk factor model used for predicting future caries risk with nevada adolescents

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of this study was to measure the validity and reliability of a multifactorial Risk Factor Model developed for use in predicting future caries risk in Nevada adolescents in a public health setting.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study examined retrospective data from an oral health surveillance initiative that screened over 51,000 students 13-18 years of age, attending public/private schools in Nevada across six academic years (2002/2003-2007/2008). The Risk Factor Model included ten demographic variables: exposure to fluoridation in the municipal water supply, environmental smoke exposure, race, age, locale (metropolitan vs. rural), tobacco use, Body Mass Index, insurance status, sex, and sealant application. Multiple regression was used in a previous study to establish which significantly contributed to caries risk. Follow-up logistic regression ascertained the weight of contribution and odds ratios of the ten variables. Researchers in this study computed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PVP), negative predictive value (PVN), and prevalence across all six years of screening to assess the validity of the Risk Factor Model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Subjects' overall mean caries prevalence across all six years was 66%. Average sensitivity across all six years was 79%; average specificity was 81%; average PVP was 89% and average PVN was 67%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Overall, the Risk Factor Model provided a relatively constant, valid measure of caries that could be used in conjunction with a comprehensive risk assessment in population-based screenings by school nurses/nurse practitioners, health educators, and physicians to guide them in assessing potential future caries risk for use in prevention and referral practices.</p

Factors associated with dental visit and barriers to utilisation of oral health care services in a sample of antenatal mothers in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aims of this study were to determine factors associated with dental visit and to describe barriers to utilisation of oral health care services among antenatal mothers attending the Obstetric and Gynaecology Specialist clinic in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A structured, self-administered questionnaire was used obtain information on the variables of interest pertaining to the current pregnancy from 124 antenatal mothers.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The majority of the mothers claimed that their oral health status was good (67.0%) or very good (2.4%). On the contrary, most of them admitted of having had at least one oral health problem (59.7%) including cavitated (43.5%) and painful teeth (15.3%), bleeding gum (21.0%), and bad breath (10.5%). However, only 29% of the mothers visited dentist during the current pregnancy. Factors associated with the mothers' dental visit were exposure to oral health education before the pregnancy and awareness of relationship between poor maternal oral health and adverse pregnancy outcomes with odds ratio of 4.06 (95% CI: 1.67-9.78) and 3.57 (95% CI: 1.30-9.77) respectively. Common excuses given by most mothers include perceptions of not having any oral health problems (65.9%), long waiting time at the clinic (71.6%), and no immediate treatment given by the dentist (64.8%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Utilisation of oral health care services among antenatal mothers was low. Mothers who reported dental visit were more likely to be those who had received oral health education before the current pregnancy and knew of the association between poor maternal oral health and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Dissatisfaction with the services rendered and perceptions of not having any oral health problems were the main barriers.</p

The APPLe Study: A Randomized, Community-Based, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Azithromycin for the Prevention of Preterm Birth, with Meta-Analysis

In a randomized trial in Malawi of azithromycin versus placebo in over 2,000 pregnant women, Jim Neilson and colleagues show no benefit of azithromycin for a number of outcomes including preterm birth and prenatal death

Causes of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes and the Role of Maternal Periodontal Status – A Review of the Literature

Preterm (PT) and Low birth weight (LBW) are considered to be the most relevant biological determinants of newborn infants survival, both in developed and in developing countries. Numerous risk factors for PT and LBW have been defined in the literature. Infections of the genitourinary tract infections along with various biological and genetic factors are considered to be the most common etiological factors for PT/LBW deliveries. However, evidence suggests that sub-clinical infection sites that are also distant from the genitor-urinary tract may be an important cause for PT/LBW deliveries. Maternal periodontal status has also been reported by many authors as a possible risk factor for PT and LBW, though not all of the actual data support such hypothesis. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence from various published literature on the association between the maternal periodontal status and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Although this review found a consistent association between periodontitis and PT/LBW, this finding should be treated with great caution until the sources of heterogeneity can be explained