Search

High-quality prevalence and incidence studies of oral conditions are essential for estimation of disease burden and comparison of estimates among countries and over time, as well as for priority setting, resource allocation, and planning public health action. Existing systematic reviews of the epidemiology of untreated dental caries, severe periodontitis, and edentulism, carried out for the Global Burden of Disease study, showed inadequate and incomplete reporting of the measurement of oral conditions as well as a lack of consistency and comparability with other health conditions. These issues are more accentuated in studies from low- and middle-income countries. Studies must meet the highest standards so that these efforts do not waste resources. This report extends the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines to improve and standardize the reporting of descriptive oral epidemiologic studies of common oral conditions. The aim of the Guidelines for Reporting Oral Epidemiologic Studies to Inform Burden Estimation (GROESBE) is to promote transparency, clarity, and comparability of scientific reporting, specifically for prevalence and incidence studies of untreated caries, severe periodontitis, and edentulism. The GROESBE guidelines and checklist were developed following a structured and formal consultation process with a geographically diverse group of 23 individuals involved in the conduct and analysis of oral epidemiologic studies. GROESBE focuses on elements that are not included in STROBE, adding 14 specific recommendations to existing guidelines. They will facilitate reliable comparison of emerging prevalence and incidence data on untreated caries, severe periodontitis, and edentulism across settings worldwide and the synthesis of robust evidence to inform estimation of disease burden in future iterations of the Global Burden of Disease study., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of preventive interventions in children who have undergone caries-related dental extractions., Methods: Rapid review across five databases (CENTRAL, Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus). Quality was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool., Results: Five studies were included, all randomised controlled trials involving pre-and/or post-extractions activity. Three studies involved oral health education (computer game, motivational interviewing, visual aids), one delivered clinical prevention (fissure sealants), and one an enhanced prevention programme combining additional health education and a clinical intervention (fluoride varnish). Retention was mixed (55%-80% in the intervention groups). Of the three studies measuring caries, all reported less caries development in the test group. However, only a study involving a dental nurse-delivered structured conversation, informed by motivational interviewing, showed an improvement in oral health. Two studies reporting on plaque and gingival bleeding had conflicting results. A study reporting on subsequent dental attendance did not demonstrate a clear improvement., Conclusion: Few published studies have explored prevention-based interventions in high caries-risk children requiring dental extractions. Whilst evidence of clinical benefit of preventive interventions in this population is limited, the potential use of contemporary behaviour change techniques appears promising. There is an urgent need for more high-quality longer-term trials using contemporary methodologies., (Copyright© 2024 Dennis Barber Ltd.)