MATERIALS AND METHODS: An audit checklist with 13 criteria for good documentation was adapted from guidelines proposed by the American Association of Orthodontists and British Orthodontic Society. Orthodontic chart documentation in 103 removable appliance therapy patients under 4th and 5th year dental undergraduates' care was retrieved from the electronic record of the University dental clinic and audited. The audit exercise explored in detail the thirteen criteria for good documentation and eight assessment attributes of the first criterion, namely, basic orthodontic examination. The level of compliance was measured as the percentage records meeting the criteria. The data were statistically analysed using SPSS 26.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
RESULTS: There was no complete compliance for any of the criteria. Thirty-five (33.9%) patient charts reported basic orthodontic examination documentation adequately. Compliance was the highest for documentation of treatment modality (77.6%), appliance delivery encounters (77.6%), and appliance adjustment appointments (83.5%). About 51.4% of the 68 patient charts (treatment of 35 patients of the total 103 were in the progress stage) stated adequately the outcome of treatment. Only 22% of the 68 patient charts had the details for retention protocol. There was statistically significant difference in chart documentation between male and female students for basic orthodontic assessment and appliance delivery and patient instructions attributes.
CONCLUSION: The clinical audit demonstrated poor compliance with the criteria for orthodontic chart documentation. The audit should be repeated after the provision of learning opportunities and self-critical analysis.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was to analyze the data on the survival of dental implants in patients with HIV.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search for relevant articles published up to November 2019 was performed in PubMed/Medline and Cochrane databases, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were adopted for the conduct of the systematic review. The most pertinent data were extracted and pooled for qualitative and quantitative analyses with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was analyzed by using I-squared statistics.
RESULTS: A total of 8 studies involving 411 individuals with HIV and 1109 implants were included in the meta-analysis. The mean follow-up period was 2.8 years. A pooled estimate of 95% of implant survival rate with 95% confidence interval(92% to 96%) was noted. Heterogeneity across the 8 studies was found to be 41% with moderate true variability.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review demonstrated that HIV infection does not pose a serious threat to implant survival on short-term evaluation, but the evidence is of low quality.
METHODS: A search for relevant articles published from inception until May 2020 was performed using PubMed/Medline, Cochrane databases, Clinicaltrials.gov, Google scholar and journal databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were adopted for the conduct of the systematic review. Using RevMan 5.3 software, the most pertinent data were extracted and pooled for quantitative analysis with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was analyzed by using Cochran Q test and I squared statistics.
RESULTS: A total of 5 studies involving 855 mixed dentition patients with arch length preservation therapy were included in the qualitative analysis. Pooled estimate of the data from two studies revealed 3.14 times higher odds of developing mandibular second molar eruption difficulty due to arch length preservation strategies using lingual holding arch (95% CI; OR 1.10-8.92). There was no heterogeneity found in the analysis. The certainty levels were graded as very low.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review demonstrates that arch length preservation strategies pose a risk for development of mandibular second molar eruption disturbances, but the evidence was of very low quality. Registration number: CRD42019116643.
PURPOSE: In this systematic review, data on dental implants' survival in sinus augmentation sites with platelet-rich plasma were examined.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized controlled trials on the topic with a minimum mean follow-up of 6 months with no language restriction were considered. Other study designs on the topic were excluded. Accordingly, relevant articles were searched in Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane databases, PubMed/Medline, and Scopus up to April 2021. Using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool, the listed studies' risk of bias was evaluated. From the included studies, the pertinent information was taken and pooled for qualitative and quantitative analysis using R software 4.1.1.
RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials involving 188 patients who underwent sinus augmentation with and without platelet-rich plasma, and 781 implants were included for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Four hundred and eleven implants were placed in the intervention group (with platelet-rich plasma) and 370 implants were placed in the control group (without platelet-rich plasma). The pooled estimate (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.91; I2 = 0%) indicated that there was no statistically significant difference observed between the groups. The test for subgroup differences showed no statistically significant differences between the subgroups (p = 0.45) with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSION: The bias associated with selective reporting of outcome data was considered as some concern for bias. This systematic review revealed that the effect of platelet-rich plasma is uncertain on the survival of dental implants.
METHODS: A draft set of EPA statements was developed based on the consensus of an expert panel. These were then mapped to the nationally determined minimum experience thresholds (clinical and procedural experiences/competencies) and aligned to task-based instructional strategy. The EPAs were validated to improve the relevance by using a criterion-based rubric.
RESULTS: An end-to-end process workflow led to the development of an EPA-based educational framework to bridge the gaps in the curriculum. The process identified a total of 41 EPAs and out of which, 10 EPAs were notated as core EPAs and will be subjected to structured workplace-based assessment complying to the national standards. The validation exercise rated core EPAs with an overall score matching close to the cut-off of 4.07 (Equal rubric).
CONCLUSION: The end-to-end process workflow provided the opportunity to elaborate a structured process for the development of EPAs for undergraduate dental education. As validation is a continuous process, feedback from implementation will inform the next steps.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive research for studies that focused on the COVID-19 pandemic and orthodontic care up to August 18, 2020, with no language restriction. The databases included PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) 2020. The research was focused on presenting symptoms, disease transmission, infection control, orthodontic care, and financial implications affecting the delivery of orthodontic treatment. The research also included reports from major health policy regulatory bodies such as World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, and major international dental and orthodontic societies and associations. The peer-reviewed publications and guidelines from the health regulatory authorities were given priority.
RESULTS: The latest information on the SARS-CoV-2 virus effects and orthodontic implications were arranged sequentially. The SARS-CoV-2 virus mode of transmission and its prevention were emphasized to keep the orthodontic and dental operatory safe for continuing practice.
CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 outbreak has changed the way orthodontics is practiced. Strict infection control, near-zero aerosol production, and minimal touch dentistry are the keys to prevent contamination of orthodontic operatory. During the pandemic, only emergency orthodontic procedures could be extended to the orthodontic patient while adhering to all the regulatory guidelines. Fortunately, to date, there is no reported case of cross-transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus at the dental setup.