Search

Background: An early diagnosis depends greatly on patient awareness. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate general awareness of oral cancer and knowledge about its risk factors, signs and symptoms. Material and methods: Cross-sectional population-based survey of randomly selected respondents conducted from March 1, 2015 to 30 June 2016. Results: A total of 5,727 people entered the survey (response rate: 53%). When asked what cancers participants had heard about, 20.3% mentioned oral cancer. Regarding risk factors, tobacco was mentioned by 55.3% of the sample (n=3,169), followed by alcohol (12.5%; n=708), poor oral hygiene (10.8%; n=618), diet (6.5%; n=377), and genetics (4.5%; n=248). Conclusions: General population has low awareness of oral cancer with poor knowledge of risk factors and main alarm signs. In addition, individuals in the risk group scored lower values in the main variables analysed; even those highly educated showed insufficient awareness and knowledge of oral cancer. In these circumstances, there is clear need for educational interventions tailored to the target audience and aimed at increasing knowledge and awareness of oral cancer to promote primary prevention of oral cancer and minimising the time interval of patients with symptomatic oral cancer in their path to treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care physicians have been reported to be the first choice for patients with oral ulcerations. This study investigates the health-seeking behaviour of lay public in Galicia (North-western Spain) if experiencing a long-standing oral ulceration. Material and Methods: Cross-sectional population-based survey of randomly selected respondents conducted from March 1, 2015 to 30 June 2016. Results: A total of 5,727 pedestrians entered the study (response rate: 53%), mostly in the 45-64 age group (30.2%; n=1,728), 47.7% of them (n=2,729) were males. Most participants (42.1%; n=2,411) reported to visit their dentist once a year and had secondary or compulsory education as their highest educational achievement (28.18%, n=1,614; 28%, n=1,600 respectively). When questioned what they would do if they had a wound/ulceration lasting longer than 3 weeks, most participants answered they would go to see their primary care physician (62.8%; n=3,597) and less than one quarter of the sample (23.8%; n=1,371) would seek consultation with their dentist. Conclusions: General Galician population would seek professional consultation about a long-standing oral ulceration, relying mostly on primary care physicians. Those neglecting these lesions are elderly, less-schooled people and unaware of oral cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the clinical information available about oral mucosal peeling (OMP) and to explore its aetiopathogenic association with dentifrices and mouthwashes. Material and Methods: PICOS outline: Population: subjects diagnosed clinically and/or pathologically. Intervention: exposition to oral hygiene products. Comparisons: patients using products at different concentrations. Outcomes: clinicopathological outcomes (primary) and oral epithelial desquamation (secondary) after use. Study design: any. Exclusion criteria: reports on secondary or unpublished data, in vitro studies. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers. Results: Fifteen reports were selected from 410 identified. Descriptive studies mainly showed low bias risk, experimental studies mostly an "unclear risk". Dentifrices or mouthwashes were linked to OMP, with an unknown origin in 5 subjects. Sodium lauryl-sulphate (SLS) was behind this disorder in 21 subjects, tartar-control dentifrices in 2, and flavouring agents in 1 case. Desquamation extension was linked to SLS concentration. Most cases were painless, leaving normal mucosa after desquamation. Tartar-control dentifrices caused ulcerations more frequently. Conclusions: OMP management should consider differential diagnosis with oral desquamative lesions, particularly desquamative gingivitis, with a guided clinical interview together with pathological confirmation while discouraging the use of the product responsible for OMP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To identify websites with adequate information on oral cancer screening for healthcare professionals (HCPs) and to assess both their quality and contents. Study Design: Websites were identified using Google and HON medical professional search engines using the terms "screening for oral cancer". The first 100 sites retrieved by each engine were analysed using the DISCERN questionnaire (reliability), the V instrument (contents on oral cancer) and further by the Flesch-Kinkaid Reading Grade Level and the Flesch Reading Ease (readability). Results: The overall rating showed minimal shortcomings in the quality of the information in the websites. The coverage and correctness of information on "visual examination" was rated as fair/good, whereas updating of contents resulted very variable (eg: 81% for visual examination and 18.2% for molecular biomarkers). These results permitted to rank the websites housing relevant information for oral cancer. Top ranking websites were affiliated to the Oral Cancer Foundation (USA), WHO Collaborating Centre for oral cancer (UK) whose webpage is entitled "Oral Cancer Education and Research", and the Clinical Guidelines maintained by the British Columbia Cancer Agency (Canada) and the British Dental Association (UK) respectively. Conclusions: There are web-based, HCP-addressed, resources on screening for oral cancer housing heterogeneous information both in quality and contents. The use of specific evaluation tools permits the selection of reliable websites on this topic with a potential to improve the existing educational gaps among HCPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]