Awareness of antibiotic prescribing and resistance in primary dental care

Dentists' knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of antibiotic prescribing: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore dentists' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding antibiotic use.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of dentists' knowledge, attitudes and perceptions regarding antibiotic use, by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science for all original paper published from January 1990 to July 2023, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA 2020) guidelines.

RESULTS

The review included 37 papers, (7 qualitative and 30 quantitative studies). Modifiable factors (knowledge, attitudes) were reported as being associated with antibiotic prescribing by dentists which were cited in 30 of the 37. These attitudes most frequently identified by dentists were: complacency (22/29); lack of trust (16/29); the need to postpone the dental procedure (17/29); and fear (8/29). Gaps in knowledge were also identified (15/29). Only one of the included articles quantified the influence between the reported modifiable factors and antibiotic prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

The review emphasizes that dentists' antibiotic prescribing is predominantly influenced by modifiable factors. This insight informs the potential for targeted interventions to curtail inappropriate antibiotic use, contributing to global efforts in reducing antibiotic resistance. The protocol of this systematic review can be found in PROSPERO under registration no. CRD42021253937.

Systemic Antibiotic Use in Acute Irreversible Pulpitis: Evaluating Clinical Practices and Molecular Insights

This scoping review systematically evaluates the use of systemic antibiotics in treating acute irreversible pulpitis, integrating clinical practice patterns with recent molecular insights. We analyzed clinical evidence on antibiotic prescription trends among dental professionals and examined molecular research advancements in relation to pulpitis. This review is intended to bridge the gap between clinical practice and molecular research, guiding more evidence-based approaches to treating acute irreversible pulpitis. Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles published in English based on the objective of the review. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms was undertaken across all the included databases. In addition, a reference list of identified articles was searched. Studies including original research, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical trials, and observational and retrospective studies, all written in English and published from 2010 onwards, were included, and an analysis of the text words contained in the titles and abstracts of the retrieved papers and of the index terms used to describe the articles was performed. A total of N = 53 articles were selected. Altogether, N = 43 (76.79%) articles were cross-sectional studies, N = 4 (11.11%) were systematic reviews, and N = 3 (5.36%) were guidelines. The most frequent level of evidence was level VI (N = 43 (76.79%). The mean percentage of dentists who prescribed antibiotics to treat acute irreversible pulpitis was 23.89 ± 23.74% (range: 0.05-75.7). Similarly, for specialists, it was 22.41 ± 15.64 (range 2.2-50.4), and the percentage for undergraduates was 17.52 ± 20.59 (range 0-62.6). The significant developments in research models for pulpitis research and the characterisation of biomarkers have led to better management strategies. Concurrently, significant advancements in molecular research provide new understandings of pulpitis, suggesting alternative therapeutic approaches. Although there are guidelines available, increased rates of antibiotic prescription are still prevalent around the globe.

Antibiotic prescriptions among dentists across Norway and the impact of COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The prescription of antibiotics in dental practice contributes significantly to the total use of antibiotics in primary healthcare. This study aimed to evaluate antibiotic prescription in dental practice during the years 2016-2021 in Norway and their relative contribution to national outpatient consumption and to investigate the influence of age, gender, geographic region, and COVID-19. A further aim was to review differences in prescribing patterns to verify effect of governmental strategies to reduce over-prescribing of antibiotics.

METHODS

This register study investigated the national antibiotic prescription between 2016 and 2021. Data was obtained from the Norwegian prescription register, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health and Statistics Norway. The consumption of 12 common antibiotics was measured using WHO defined daily doses (DDDs), DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day (DIDs 1000).

RESULTS

A total of 6,049,445 antibiotic prescriptions of the 12 investigated compounds were issued in primary care during the study period. Dentists accounted for 942,350 prescriptions corresponding to 15.6% of the total. An overall decrease in the number of prescriptions by health professions other than dentists during the 5 years (IRR = 0.92, 95% CI:0.92-0.93, p < 0.001) was observed. For dentists a slight increase in the number of prescriptions (IRR = 1.01, 95% CI: 1.01-1.01, p < 0.001) was seen over the study period. The increase of antibiotic prescriptions in dentistry was more pronounced during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 4 most prescribed type of antibiotics based on average number of DDDs of the total period 2016-2021 were in descending order; phenoxymethylpenicillin (1,109,150) followed by amoxicillin (126,244), clindamycin (72,565), and metronidazole (64,599). An unexpected finding was that the prescription of the combination compound amoxicillin/clavulanic acid had significantly increased in dentistry during the last 5 years. Geographic, gender, and age differences in the rates of prescriptions were also seen. The data revealed that there are seasonal variations in dental prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Noticeable differences exist in prescribing patterns of antibiotics in the last 5 years. Restricted access to dental care due to COVID-19 may have resulted in increased antibiotic prescribing in dentistry as opposed to an otherwise downward trend. Despite national guidelines there is still a need for improvement of antibiotic stewardship in dentistry and to define effective methods to disseminate information.

Waking Up to Antibiotic Resistance

Background

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has emerged as a global concern, particularly in developing countries where its causes seem to entrench the knowledge, attitude, and practice of healthcare professionals and patients toward the use of antimicrobials.

Methods

This review aims to provide a compendious yet thorough overview of our understanding of antibiotic resistance pertaining to dentistry. Literature provides evidence of inadequate antibiotic prescribing practices by dental professionals. Considering the growing concern about antibiotic prescribing habits and patient's tendencies of improper use, we attempt to address the interventional efforts of dentists and patients in the context to focus on the root causes specifically to prevention of the antimicrobial resistance.

Results

Following the guidelines and flowchart depicted in this article, the members of dental professions will get clear views on the use of antibiotics. This will cause a definite decrease in the growing concern about antibiotic resistance.

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices among Pharmacy and Non-Pharmacy Interns in Saudi Arabia Regarding Antibiotic Use and Antibiotic Resistance: A Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study

This cross-sectional descriptive study aims to explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practices among pharmacy, dentistry, medicine, and nursing interns in Saudi Arabia regarding antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance. Interns received a soft copy of a structured and validated self-administered questionnaire using an online survey platform. A total of 266 interns responded to the questionnaire. On average, the participants achieved good scores in the knowledge and practice domains, followed by the attitude domain. The average knowledge percentage was 76.1% (SD 17.1) compared to 84.6% (SD 20.5) for practices and 61.5% (SD 23.2) for attitudes. The results suggest that pharmacy interns had insignificantly better overall scores compared to non-pharmacy interns for knowledge, attitudes, and practices. This study shows that the scores for knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pharmacy, dentistry, medicine, and nursing interns regarding antibiotic use and resistance were high overall. However, interns' belief in their responsibility in preventing antibiotic resistance is lacking.

Antibiotic utilization in emergency dental care in Stockholm 2016: a cross sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate systemic antibiotics utilization in emergency dental care and to determine the most common treatment measures performed during emergency visits in public versus private emergency care in Sweden.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two questionnaires were answered by dentists at one large public and one large private emergency dental clinic in Stockholm, Sweden. The first questionnaire pertained to the emergency care provided to patients (n = 1023) and the second concerned the dentists' (n = 13) own knowledge and attitudes towards antibiotic treatment and oral infections. The results of the questionnaires were tested using a Chi-square test.

RESULTS

Sixteen percent of all patients seeking emergency dental treatment received antibiotics. The most common overall reason for visiting an emergency clinic was pain (52%, n = 519). The most common diagnoses made by the participating dentists in the public clinic were tooth/filling fracture (17%, n = 91) and gingivitis (14%, n = 76), while in the private clinic they were tooth fracture (29%, n = 146) and symptomatic apical periodontitis (15%, n = 72). Although the number of patients with infection was higher in the public care clinic, there was no significant difference in total number of antibiotic prescriptions between the two clinics. The rate of patients receiving antibiotic prescription as sole treatment was 41% (n = 34) in private care and 31% (n = 18) in public care. Thirty-one percent (n = 4) of dentists prescribed antibiotics for patients with diagnoses normally not requiring antibiotics, citing reasons such as time limitation, patient request, patient travel, patient safety, and follow-up not possible.

CONCLUSION

Although antibiotic prescription frequency among the Swedish emergency care dentists participating in this study was low, areas for improvement could include providing education to improve dentists' knowledge on both antibiotic prescription in emergency dental care and treatment of acute oral infections.

Factors, Perceptions and Beliefs Associated with Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing in German Primary Dental Care: A Qualitative Study

Dentists account for up to 10% of all prescribed antibiotics in primary care, with up to 80% being inappropriate. Targeted approaches to change prescription behavior are scarce. This study aimed at identifying specific barriers and facilitators for prudent antibiotic use in German dentistry by using qualitative methods. Nine in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions with another nine dentists were conducted and analyzed thematically. Dentists described being conflicted by the discordance of available treatment time and the necessity of thorough therapy. Lacking the opportunity of follow-up led to uncertainty. Dentists felt a lack of medical competency concerning prophylaxis for infectious endocarditis. A lack of empowerment to make therapeutic decisions interfered with guideline-conformity. The communication with fellow physicians is conflictual and improvement was wished for. In consequence, dentists felt pressure by potential medico-legal liability. Patients demanding quick and easy pain relief put extra strain on the interviewed dentists. Our hypotheses concord with preliminary data, mainly from the UK, but highlighted specifically medico-legal concerns and interprofessional communication as even greater barriers as described before. Tailored interventional concepts based on our findings may have the potential to lower antibiotic prescriptions in German primary dental care.

Effect of governmental strategies on antibiotic prescription in dentistry

Objective: To study the effect of governmental strategies, to constitute and publish recommendations on antibiotic usage in dentistry, on the antibiotic consumption.Material and methods: Descriptive statistics regarding antibiotic prescription between 2009 and 2017 was retrieved from two national registers, the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register and the Dental Health register, both administered by the National Board of Health and Welfare. Age standardization was applied to alleviate the comparison between gender, different regions and years.Results: The number of dispatched prescriptions of antibiotics from dentists was reduced with 31% during the study period. 10% of the visits to a dentist generated an antibiotic prescription corresponding to 7% of the total number of antibiotic prescriptions. A decline in prescription was observed after publication of national recommendations for antibiotics prophylaxis in 2012 and antibiotic treatment in 2014. Unexplained geographical and gender differences in the rates of prescription were seen.Conclusions: Data indicates a correlation between introduction of governmental strategies to reduce antibiotic usage and declining antibiotic prescription. Although a marked reduction in prescription was observed, the results indicate that there is further potential for improvement of antibiotic stewardship in odontology.

Antibiotic use and resistance: a nationwide questionnaire survey among French dentists

The aim of this survey was to describe the attitudes and self-reported practices of French dentists towards antibiotic use and resistance and to compare practices with national guidelines. A nationwide cross-sectional internet-based survey was conducted among the 41,800 French dentists. The online questionnaire was distributed through professional networks from April 2017 to April 2018. Seven-hundred seventy-five dentists participated but only 455 questionnaires were complete enough to be included in the analyses. Amoxicillin was the most frequently prescribed antibiotic (65.8%, 1783/2711), followed by spiramycin + metronidazole fixed-dose combination (11.6%, 312/2711) and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (10.3%, 279/2711). The main indications for use were abscess (349/423, 82.5%), cervicofacial cellulitis (74.2%, 314/423), and pericoronitis (58.6%, 239/408). Most dentists (90.5%, 381/421) considered that antibiotic resistance is of concern but only half of them (56.3%, 238/423) felt adequately informed about antibiotic use. Many dentists did not comply with the national guidelines: the majority of them declared inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions for 11/17 clinical situations. They did not prescribe antibiotics for 5/6 clinical situations requiring prophylaxis. They reported that the publication of clinical guidelines is the main factor influencing their prescriptions (71.0%, 299/421). They wished to receive regular updates of national guidelines in the form of practical sheets (93.0%, 172/185). French dentists should urgently be targeted by antibiotic stewardship initiatives.

Antibiotic Susceptibility Patterns of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans and Porphyromonas gingivalis Strains from Different Decades

The aim of this study was to determine the antibiotic susceptibility patterns of 57 Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans and 56 Porphyromonas gingivalis strains isolated from subgingival biofilm samples of periodontitis patients in Switzerland from 1980 to 2017. The minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of the most commonly used antibiotics in periodontal therapy (amoxicillin, metronidazole, azithromycin, and doxycycline) or in severe body infections (amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, clindamycin, ertapenem, and moxifloxacin) were determined. Furthermore, all the strains were screened for beta-lactamase activity and the presence of selected resistance genes (cfxA, ermF, and tetQ). Overall, there was no significant increase in MIC values over the 37‑year period. Two of the most recent P. gingivalis isolates yielded the highest MIC values. The first isolate was ermF-positive with MIC values >8 µg/mL, 2 µg/mL, and 0.25 µg/mL for clindamycin, azithromycin, and moxifloxacin, respectively. The second isolate showed a high MIC value of 4 µg/mL for moxifloxacin, which was associated with a confirmed single-point mutation in the quinolone resistance-determining region (QRDR) of the gyrA gene. Although there was no significant increase in the antibiotic resistance among the oral bacterial isolates tested, the detection of resistant P. gingivalis isolates underlines the need to optimize the antibiotic therapeutic protocols in dentistry.

Nursing Students' Knowledge and Awareness of Antibiotic Use, Resistance and Stewardship: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study

Antibiotic resistance is an emerging worldwide concern with serious repercussions in terms of morbi-mortality. Bearing in mind that the inadequate use of antibiotics, by healthcare staff as well as by the general population, is one of its main causes, a multidisciplinary approach is required to try to combat it. The aim of the present study was to determine nursing students’ knowledge and awareness of antibiotic use, resistance and stewardship. A cross-sectional design was used. A total of 578 nursing students from the University of Santiago de Compostela (Spain), ≥18 years old of both sexes were invited to complete the Spanish version of the questionnaire “Knowledge and awareness of the use, resistance and administration of antibiotics” between February and April 2019. Students had a low level of knowledge about antibiotics, 4.1 (CI95% = 3.4–4.8), especially in relation to antibiotic resistance. As the students were aware of this deficiency, the majority affirmed (>90%) that the current curriculum of nursing degree should have more training on antibiotics and infection control. Nursing staff play an important role in the rational use of antibiotics and as teachers of patients, so their training could be key in fighting antibiotic resistance.

Prescribing trends of systemic antibiotics by periodontists in Australia

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are a common systemic pharmaceutical therapy in periodontal conditions for dental practitioners as well as specialists. However, there is limited information about prescribing patterns amongst the periodontists within Australia. The objective of this study is to examine current patterns and perceptions in prescribing systemic antibiotics for the treatment of periodontal and peri-implant diseases.

METHODS

An online questionnaire was disseminated to Australian practicing members of the Australia and New Zealand Academy of Periodontists (ANZAP) to determine their antibiotic prescribing patterns for different periodontal conditions. Indications that were analyzed included: chronic periodontitis, plaque-induced gingivitis, aggressive periodontitis, acute gingival and periodontal conditions, conditions associated with implants and implant placement, periodontal regeneration, and mucogingival surgery.

RESULTS

Out of the 50 members that participated in the study, 38 completed the questionnaire. Systemic antibiotics prescription patterns varied markedly for different periodontal or peri-implant diseases among respondents. 79% reported prescription of systemic antibiotics in the treatment of chronic periodontitis whereas 52.6%, 55.3%, 18.4% of the respondents did so for periodontal regeneration procedures, implant placement surgery, and mucogingival surgery, respectively. Azithromycin, the combination of Amoxicillin and Metronidazole, and Amoxicillin were the three most commonly prescribed systemic antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of this survey, systemic antibiotics are widely used by the group of periodontists surveyed in this study in Australia with varying rates and patterns for different periodontal and peri-implant conditions. The current study highlights the need for recommendations and guidelines in the prescription of antibiotics for periodontal and peri-implant conditions.

Dentists' prescribing of antibiotics and opioids to Medicare Part D beneficiaries: Medications of high impact to public health

BACKGROUND

Gaining a better understanding of dental prescribing can help identify opportunities for intervention regarding optimal medication use. The purpose of this study is to characterize opioid and antibiotic prescribing patterns of dentists in the United States for Medicare Part D beneficiaries.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of national 2014 Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use File data. Providers in the data set with dental-related disciplines were included (n = 99,797). Outcomes of interest were mean days' supply and mean number of claims reported per claim, beneficiary, and prescriber discipline.

RESULTS

Of the 6,724,372 dental prescription claims submitted, 3,947,848 (58.7%) and 1,312,796 (19.5%) were for antibiotics and opioids, respectively. Sixty-nine percent of dentists in the highest quartile of opioid prescribers were also in the highest quartile of antibiotic prescribers (r² = 0.7778; P < .01). The mean (standard deviation) days' supply per claim was 6.9 (5.3) days (range, 1-90 days) for antibiotics and 3.6 (2.0) days (range, 1-44.5 days) for opioids. Of the 33,348 dental providers who prescribed opioids, 18,971 (56.9%) prescribed a mean opioid days per claim greater than the recommended duration of 3 days for acute pain.

CONCLUSION

Opioids and antibiotics are the medications most prescribed by dentists. On the basis of national recommendations and results of studies from other countries, the length of therapy prescribed may be excessive. Further studies should be conducted to assess appropriateness of dental prescriptions.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Dentistry should be considered for antibiotic and opioid stewardship interventions along with medicine.

A Survey on the Use of Antibiotics among the Dentists of Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Introduction

Dental infections are multimicrobial in origin with their etiological factors involving a combination of Gram-positive, Gram-negative, facultative anaerobes, and obligate anaerobic bacteria. Thus, antibiotics and analgesics account for a great majority of medicines prescribed by the dental surgeons. Inappropriate prescription of antibiotics by health care professionals has become a worldwide issue nowadays.

Aim

The purpose of the present study was to:

• Determine the pattern of antibiotic prescription among dentists of Kolkata.

• Assess the attitude of dentists toward antibiotic resistance.

Materials and methods

An electronic version of the questionnaire of cross-sectional survey regarding antibiotic use and attitude toward growing antibiotic resistance was constructed using Qualtrics (Qualtrics Pvt. Limited Provo, Utah), an internet online survey tool that was e-mailed to dental surgeons of Kolkata registered with Indian Dental Association (IDA), West Bengal. A reminder e-mail was given after 1 month to recollect the responses from them.

Results

The survey was e-mailed to 300 dental surgeons, out of which 115 dental surgeons completed the survey, thereby achieving a response rate of 38.33%. Majority of the respondents (60%) chose amoxicillin in nonallergic patients. Average minimum duration of antibiotic therapy was 5 days. The drug of first choice for patients with an allergy to penicillin was erythromycin. The prime determinant of antibiotic use was facial swelling (68%). The prime determinant to select a particular brand of antibiotics was affordability of that brand (61%). Almost all (99%) dental surgeons were aware of antibiotic resistance being a growing concern. As per their views, there was overprescription of antibiotics.

How to cite this article: Kaul R, Angrish P, Jain P, Saha S, Sengupta AV, Mukherjee S. A Survey on the Use of Antibiotics among the Dentists of Kolkata, West Bengal, India. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2018;11(2):122-127.

The knowledge mobilisation challenge: does producing evidence lead to its adoption within dentistry?

The transfer of evidence into clinical practice is the ultimate aim of those engaged in health research. But is this a process that occurs naturally? Can health researchers take it for granted that the evidence they produce will be embraced by clinicians and incorporated into their everyday practice? In this article, we use the example of oral healthcare in dependent older people and the issue of antibiotic prescribing by GDPs to illustrate the fact that successful knowledge transfer between researchers and practitioners cannot be automatically assumed. What is needed, so we argue, are certain tools to facilitate the knowledge transfer, exchange and implementation process. These tools may take the form of human intermediaries, who can occupy the space in between the worlds of research and practice, acting as brokers to mobilise knowledge, or through the establishment of communities of practice. We outline both of these approaches here as a potential solution to the problem of knowledge mobilisation in dentistry.

Antibiotic prescribing by general dentists in the United States, 2013

BACKGROUND

Dentists prescribe approximately 10% of outpatient antibiotics, but little is known about dentists' antibiotic prescribing patterns. The authors conducted a study to characterize prescribing by dentists according to antibiotic agent and category, patient demographic characteristics, and geographic region in the United States.

METHODS

The authors identified oral antibiotic prescriptions dispensed during 2013 in the Xponent (QuintilesIMS) database. The authors used the total number of prescriptions and county-level census population denominators to calculate prescribing rates. In addition, the authors analyzed prescribing according to individual agent, drug category, and patient demographic characteristics and the total number of prescriptions calculated for general dentists overall.

RESULTS

Dentists prescribed 24.5 million courses of antibiotics in 2013, a prescribing rate of 77.5 prescriptions per 1,000 people. Penicillins were the most commonly prescribed antibiotic category. Dentists prescribed most antibiotics for adults older than 19 years. The Northeast census region had the highest prescribing rate per 1,000 people. The District of Columbia had the highest prescribing rate of 99.5 per 1,000 people, and Delaware had the lowest prescribing rate of 50.7 per 1,000 people.

CONCLUSIONS

Dentists prescribe large quantities of antibiotics in outpatient settings, and there is considerable geographic variability. Additional study is needed to better understand the reasons for this variability and identify areas of possible intervention and improvement.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Continued efforts to combat antibiotic resistance will require all prescribers, including dentists, to examine prescribing behaviors for appropriateness and the effectiveness of guidelines to identify opportunities to optimize antibiotic use.

An Audit and Feedback Intervention for Reducing Antibiotic Prescribing in General Dental Practice: The RAPiD Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Dentists prescribe approximately 10% of antibiotics dispensed in UK community pharmacies. Despite clear clinical guidance, dentists often prescribe antibiotics inappropriately. This cluster-randomised controlled trial used routinely collected National Health Service (NHS) dental prescribing and treatment claim data to compare the impact of individualised audit and feedback (A&F) interventions on dentists' antibiotic prescribing rates.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

All 795 antibiotic prescribing NHS general dental practices in Scotland were included. Practices were randomised to the control (practices = 163; dentists = 567) or A&F intervention group (practices = 632; dentists = 1,999). A&F intervention practices were allocated to one of two A&F groups: (1) individualised graphical A&F comprising a line graph plotting an individual dentist's monthly antibiotic prescribing rate (practices = 316; dentists = 1,001); or (2) individualised graphical A&F plus a written behaviour change message synthesising and reiterating national guidance recommendations for dental antibiotic prescribing (practices = 316; dentists = 998). Intervention practices were also simultaneously randomised to receive A&F: (i) with or without a health board comparator comprising the addition of a line to the graphical A&F plotting the monthly antibiotic prescribing rate of all dentists in the health board; and (ii) delivered at 0 and 6 mo or at 0, 6, and 9 mo, giving a total of eight intervention groups. The primary outcome, measured by the trial statistician who was blinded to allocation, was the total number of antibiotic items dispensed per 100 NHS treatment claims over the 12 mo post-delivery of the baseline A&F. Primary outcome data was available for 152 control practices (dentists = 438) and 609 intervention practices (dentists = 1,550). At baseline, the number of antibiotic items prescribed per 100 NHS treatment claims was 8.3 in the control group and 8.5 in the intervention group. At follow-up, antibiotic prescribing had decreased by 0.4 antibiotic items per 100 NHS treatment claims in control practices and by 1.0 in intervention practices. This represents a significant reduction (-5.7%; 95% CI -10.2% to -1.1%; p = 0.01) in dentists' prescribing rate in the intervention group relative to the control group. Intervention subgroup analyses found a 6.1% reduction in the antibiotic prescribing rate of dentists who had received the written behaviour change message relative to dentists who had not (95% CI -10.4% to -1.9%; p = 0.01). There was no significant between-group difference in the prescribing rate of dentists who received a health board comparator relative to those who did not (-4.3%; 95% CI -8.6% to 0.1%; p = 0.06), nor between dentists who received A&F at 0 and 6 mo relative to those who received A&F at 0, 6, and 9 mo (0.02%; 95% CI -4.2% to 4.2%; p = 0.99). The key limitations relate to the use of routinely collected datasets which did not allow evaluation of any effects on inappropriate prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

A&F derived from routinely collected datasets led to a significant reduction in the antibiotic prescribing rate of dentists.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49204710.

Endodontic Risk Management: A Dento-Legal Perspective

This article provides an overview of some of the issues in the assessment and management of endodontic patients which may lead to dento-legal problems. It covers assessment, the appropriate use of radiographs, special tests and the importance of following the correct consent process. It outlines why record-keeping is particularly important, and looks at problems that occur, such as perforation, fractured instruments and hypochlorite accidents.

Barriers and facilitators of evidence-based management of patients with bacterial infections among general dental practitioners: a theory-informed interview study

Background

General dental practitioners (GDPs) regularly prescribe antibiotics to manage dental infections although most infections can be treated successfully by local measures. Published guidance to support GDPs to make appropriate prescribing decisions exists but there continues to be wide variation in dental antibiotic prescribing. An interview study was conducted as part of the Reducing Antibiotic Prescribing in Dentistry (RAPiD) trial to understand the barriers and facilitators of using local measures instead of prescribing antibiotics to manage bacterial infections.

Methods

Thirty semi-structured one-to-one telephone interviews were conducted using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Responses were coded into domains of the TDF and sub-themes. Priority domains (high frequency: ≥50 % interviewees discussed) relevant to behaviour change were identified as targets for future intervention efforts and mapped onto ‘intervention functions’ of the Behaviour Change Wheel system.

Results

Five domains (behavioural regulation, social influences, reinforcement, environmental context and resources, and beliefs about consequences) with seven sub-themes were identified as targets for future intervention. All participants had knowledge about the evidence-based management of bacterial infections, but they reported difficulties in following this due to patient factors and time management. Lack of time was found to significantly influence their decision processes with regard to performing local measures. Beliefs about their capabilities to overcome patient influence, beliefs that performing local measures would impact on subsequent appointment times as well as there being no incentives for performing local measures were also featured. Though no knowledge or basic skills issues were identified, the participants suggested some continuous professional development programmes (e.g. time management, an overview of published guidance) to address some of the barriers. The domain results suggest a number of intervention functions through which future interventions could change GDPs’ antibiotic prescribing for bacterial infections: imparting skills through training, providing an example for GDPs to imitate (i.e. modelling) or creating the expectation of a reward (i.e. incentivisation).

Conclusions

This is the first theoretically informed study to identify barriers and facilitators of evidence-based management of patients with bacterial infections among GDPs. A pragmatic approach is needed to address the modifiable barriers in future interventions intended to change dentists’ inappropriate prescribing behaviour.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0372-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.