A survey of antibiotic use in dentistry

Prevalence and Factors Influencing Post-Operative Complications following Tooth Extraction: A Narrative Review

Background

Complications from dental extractions may result in multiple post-operative visits and adversely affect the patient's life. Preventing complications may decrease post-operative morbidity for the individual as well as lower societal costs, such as lost time from work and healthcare costs.

Objectives

This narrative review aims to assess the prevalence and factors influencing post-operative complications following tooth extraction, helping clinicians minimise the risk. Data Sources. Cross-sectional studies. Study Eligibility and Participants. Patients undergoing dental extractions. Our exclusion criteria included in vitro studies, animal studies, terminally ill patients, and tooth loss not due to dental extraction. Literature was collected from "PubMed" and "Web of Science" through search criteria based on the "PICO" framework. Twenty articles were used to formulate a prevalence table, and 156 articles were included for the factors influencing complications. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods. This narrative review was reported using the SANRA (a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles) checklist. Due to the scope of our narrative review and its associated objectives, the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS) will be conducted from the studies outlining the prevalence.

Results

Alveolar osteitis appears to be the most prevalent post-operative complication following tooth extraction. Predisposing factors can be significant in their ability to alter the risk of postoperative complications, and clinicians should provide patient-centred care to mitigate this risk. Limitations. Due to the breadth of context, a systematic review was not feasible, as it may have introduced heterogeneity.

Conclusion

This narrative review has highlighted an array of factors which can influence the prevalence of post-operative complications. Future research would benefit from individually reporting post-operative complications, reducing the heterogeneity in definitions of the complications, and including greater detail on the predisposing factors studied.

Knowledge and Attitude Toward Antibiotic Prescription Among Dental Students and Interns at Multiple Universities in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Dental students in Saudi Arabia are authorized to write prescriptions for antibiotics during practical training. Adverse side effects and resistance could result from inappropriate prescription. Accordingly, there is a need to evaluate the knowledge of dental students regarding guidelines and applications of antibiotic prescription.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the knowledge and attitude toward guidelines and applications of antibiotic prescription among dental students and interns at multiple universities in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among dental students in their final clinical years (4th to 6th year) and dental interns. The study data were collected using a valid and reliable structured questionnaire comprising three domains: 1) demographic characteristics, 2) knowledge, and 3) attitude toward antibiotic prescription for dental and systemic conditions. The data were analyzed and presented as frequency percentages, and the chi-square test was used to compare the knowledge and attitude items between the dental students and interns. The statistical significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 248 participants (women: 55.6%, men: 44.4%) were included in the study. Approximately 21.8% were 4th year students; 17.7%, 5th year students; 12.9%, 6th year students; and 47.6%, interns. For most items, the knowledge level was relatively high, and the attitude was generally positive among the participants. Approximately, 87.1% had good knowledge about current guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis, 83.9% about antibiotic prescription, and 95.2% about antibiotic resistance. The interns showed significantly higher knowledge levels and favorable attitude, particularly for guidelines and applications of antibiotic prescription and correct use of antibiotics for oral cases, than did the students. Amoxicillin was the most frequently prescribed antibiotic among the participants.

CONCLUSION

The interns and 6th-year students demonstrated a relatively high knowledge level and positive attitude toward appropriate antibiotic prescriptions. However, deficiencies were observed among the students in their early clinical years, particularly for systemic conditions. These findings highlight the importance of implementing educational campaigns and providing guidelines to promote the appropriate use of antibiotics among dental students in their final clinical years.

The Effect of Terra-Cortril as Local Pain Medication on the Healing Process of a Fresh Extraction Socket: A Retrospective Cohort Study

(1) Background: Use of Terra-Cortril may reduce pain and discomfort after tooth extraction. It is widely used among dentists, especially for third molar extraction and for treatment of dry socket. Only few case reports described unsuccessful healing with formation of myospherulosis. (2) Aim: The primary objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the occurrence of unsuccessful healing between extraction sockets locally treated with Terra-Cortril (TC) (exposure cohort) and extraction sockets subjected to unassisted healing (non-exposure cohort). The assessment of the three-dimensional morphology of the bone was a secondary objective. (3) Material and methods: The records of patients who had one or more extractions between 1 January 2020 and 1 July 2021 followed by implant placement in one private practice were retrieved and data were extracted. At the time of implant placement, practitioners established, both clinically and radiographically, if the healing was successful or unsuccessful. Explanatory demographic as well as clinical variables were extracted from patient files, checked and supplemented by contacting patients in cases of missing data. (4) Results: 69 patients were included who had, in total, 99 extractions. The exposure cohort included 55 sites, while the non-exposure cohort included 44 sites. A total of 56 sites demonstrated successful healing, and 53 showed unsuccessful healing. The regression model identified TC as a significant predictor (p = 0.014) for unsuccessful healing with an odds ratio of 2.86. Sites treated with Terra-Cortril had a significantly greater bone defect at level -1 mm, level -3 mm, and level -5 mm from the bone crest, and significantly greater maximal vertical and horizontal bone defects. At sites where Terra-Cortril was used, significantly more surgical consequences were reported (70.91% vs. 18.18%, p < 0.001). (5) Conclusions: fresh extraction sockets treated with Terra-Cortril increased the likelihood of unsuccessful healing with an odds ratio of 2.86. The greater defect size leads to significantly more limitations when planning implants at sites previously treated with TC.

Antibiotics in Dentistry: A Narrative Review of the Evidence beyond the Myth

Antibiotics have undoubtedly revolutionized medicine and the health and survival of patients with life-threatening infections, being nonetheless free from potential adverse effects, and the risk of intestinal dysbiosis, antimicrobial resistance, and the resulting consequences for the patient's health and the public purse. The present study narratively reviewed the epidemiological data on worldwide antibiotic consumption and administration in dental practice, patients' adherence to prescriptions, the antimicrobial resistance phenomenon in dentistry, and the evidence supporting and recommending appropriate antibiotic use in dental care. Eligible systematic reviews and original studies in humans published in the English language from January 2000 to 26 January 2023 were considered. A total of 78 studies, 47 on the epidemiology of antibiotic use and prescription in dentistry, 6 on antibiotic therapy in dentistry, 12 on antibiotic prophylaxis in dentistry, 0 on adherence of dental patients to antibiotic prescription, and 13 on antimicrobial resistance in dentistry, were presently considered. Retrieved evidence revealed that antibiotics are frequently overused and misused in dental practice, dental patients frequently do not adhere to prescriptions, and antimicrobial resistance in dentistry is a still rising phenomenon also secondary to improper oral antiseptics use. The present findings highlighted the need to establish more evidence-based and accurate antibiotic prescriptions to sensitize dentists and dental patients to minimize and rationalize the use of antibiotics only when it is indicated and necessary, improve patients' adherence, and enhance knowledge and awareness of the antimicrobial resistance in dentistry.

Risk Factors for Delayed-Onset Infection after Mandibular Wisdom Tooth Extractions

Wisdom tooth extraction is one of the most commonly performed procedures by oral maxillofacial surgeons. Delayed-onset infection (DOI) is a rare complication of wisdom tooth extraction, and it occurs ~1–4 weeks after the extraction. In the present study, risk factors for DOI were investigated by retrospectively analyzing the cases of 1400 mandibular wisdom tooth extractions performed at Kagawa University Hospital from April 2015 to June 2022. Inclusion criteria were patients aged >15 years with a wisdom tooth extraction per our procedure. The exclusion criteria were patients with insufficient medical records, a >30-mm lesion around the wisdom tooth shown via X-ray, colonectomy, radiotherapy treatment of the mandible, the lack of panoramic images, and lesions other than a follicular cyst. The DOI incidence was 1.1% (16 cases), and univariate analyses revealed that the development of DOI was significantly associated with the Winter classification (p = 0.003), position (p = 0.003), hypertension (p = 0.011), and hemostatic agent use (p = 0.004). A multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that position (OR = B for A, 7.75; p = 0.0163), hypertension (OR = 7.60, p = 0.013), and hemostatic agent use (OR = 6.87, p = 0.0022) were significantly associated with DOI development. Hypertension, hemostatic use, and position were found to be key factors for DOI; long-term observation may thus be necessary for patients with these risk factors.

Antibiotic Prescription During Endodontic Treatment: Knowledge and Practices of Dental Interns in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are widely used in dental practice, especially for endodontic infections. The present survey aimed to investigate the knowledge and practices of dental interns in Saudi Arabia regarding antibiotic prescription for endodontic treatment.

METHODS

The present online questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study involved dental interns in private and public dental schools, Saudi Arabia. A pre-validated questionnaire was distributed to 900 dental interns via different social media platforms. The questionnaire consisted of 16 close-ended questions related to participants' demographic data and knowledge and practices of antibiotic prescription in context of endodontic treatments. Data were managed and analyzed using IBM-SPSS version 25, and Chi-square test was used to compare between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 555 dental interns completed the questionnaire, giving a response rate of 61.1%. Overall, the surveyed participants revealed inadequate knowledge and unnecessary use of antibiotics during endodontic procedures. While majority of the participants (75.3%) correctly identified the first choice of antibiotics during endodontic treatments, a considerable proportion of the participants did not recognize the clinical indications of antibiotics in endodontic patients. Additionally, around one-fifth (18.9%) of the participants were unaware of the potential side effects of the prescribed antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

The present survey revealed unsatisfactory knowledge and practices of antibiotic prescription in context of endodontic therapy among Saudi dental interns. Therefore, dental schools in Saudi Arabia should address such a gap through updating the curriculum and integrating real-world clinical scenarios using problem-based learning. Additionally, periodic continuous education courses aiming at improving dental professionals' knowledge about antibiotics and their clinical uses for endodontic therapy are highly encouraged.

Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket)

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a complication of dental extractions more often involving mandibular molar teeth. It is associated with severe pain developing 2 to 3 days postoperatively with or without halitosis, a socket that may be partially or totally devoid of a blood clot, and increased postoperative visits. This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2012.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of local interventions used for the prevention and treatment of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) following tooth extraction.

SEARCH METHODS

An Information Specialist searched four bibliographic databases up to 28 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of adults over 18 years of age who were having permanent teeth extracted or who had developed dry socket postextraction. We included studies with any type of local intervention used for the prevention or treatment of dry socket, compared to a different local intervention, placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies reporting on systemic use of antibiotics or the use of surgical techniques because these interventions are evaluated in separate Cochrane Reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We followed Cochrane statistical guidelines and reported dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For some of the split-mouth studies with sparse data, it was not possible to calculate RR so we calculated the exact odds ratio (OR) instead. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 trials with 6771 participants; 39 trials (with 6219 participants) investigated prevention of dry socket and 10 studies (with 552 participants) looked at the treatment of dry socket. 16 studies were at high risk of bias, 30 studies at unclear risk of bias, and 3 studies at low risk of bias. Chlorhexidine in the prevention of dry socket When compared to placebo, rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinses (0.12% and 0.2% concentrations) both before and 24 hours after extraction(s) substantially reduced the risk of developing dry socket with an OR of 0.38 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.58; P < 0.00001; 6 trials, 1547 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The prevalence of dry socket varies from 1% to 5% in routine dental extractions to upwards of 30% in surgically extracted third molars. The number of patients needed to be treated (NNT) with chlorhexidine rinse to prevent one patient having dry socket was 162 (95% CI 155 to 240), 33 (95% CI 27 to 49), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 10) for control prevalence of dry socket 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively.  Compared to placebo, placing chlorhexidine gel intrasocket after extractions reduced the odds of developing a dry socket by 58% with an OR of 0.44 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.71; P = 0.0008; 7 trials, 753 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The NNT with chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) to prevent one patient developing dry socket was 180 (95% CI 137 to 347), 37 (95% CI 28 to 72), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 15) for control prevalence of dry socket of 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively. Compared to chlorhexidine rinse (0.12%), placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) intrasocket after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of dry socket (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.20; P = 0.22; 2 trials, 383 participants; low-certainty evidence).  The present review found some evidence for the association of minor adverse reactions with use of 0.12%, 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses (alteration in taste, staining of teeth, stomatitis) though most studies were not designed explicitly to detect the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to mouthwash as part of the study protocol. No adverse events were reported in relation to the use of 0.2% chlorhexidine gel placed directly into a socket. Platelet rich plasma in the prevention of dry socket  Compared to placebo, placing platelet rich plasma after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of having a dry socket (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.33; P = 0.17; 2 studies, 127 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  A further 21 intrasocket interventions to prevent dry socket were each evaluated in single studies, and there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects. Zinc oxide eugenol versus Alvogyl in the treatment of dry socket Two studies, with 80 participants, showed that Alvogyl (old formulation) is more effective than zinc oxide eugenol at reducing pain at day 7 (mean difference (MD) -1.40, 95% CI -1.75 to -1.04; P < 0.00001; 2 studies, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence) A further nine interventions for the treatment of dry socket were evaluated in single studies, providing insufficient evidence to determine their effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tooth extractions are generally undertaken by dentists for a variety of reasons, however, all but five studies included in the present review included participants undergoing extraction of third molars, most of which were undertaken by oral surgeons. There is moderate-certainty evidence that rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% and 0.2%) or placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) in the sockets of extracted teeth, probably results in a reduction in dry socket. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the other 21 preventative interventions each evaluated in single studies. There was limited evidence of very low certainty that Alvogyl (old formulation) may reduce pain at day 7 in patients with dry socket when compared to zinc oxide eugenol.

Antibiotic prophylaxis prescriptions prior to dental visits in the Veterans' Health Administration (VHA), 2015-2019

OBJECTIVE

To determine prophylaxis appropriateness by Veterans' Affairs (VA) dentists.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study of dental visits, 2015-2019.

METHODS

Antibiotics within 7 days before a visit in the absence of an oral infection were included. Appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis was defined as visits with gingival manipulation and further delineated into narrow and broad definitions based on comorbidities. The primary analysis applied a narrow definition of appropriate prophylaxis: cardiac conditions at the highest risk of an adverse outcome from endocarditis. The secondary analysis included a broader definition: cardiac or immunocompromising condition or tooth extractions and/or implants. Multivariable log-linear Poisson generalized estimating equation regression was used to assess the association between covariates and unnecessary prophylaxis prescriptions.

RESULTS

In total, 358,078 visits were associated with 369,102 antibiotics. The median prescription duration was 7 days (IQR, 7-10); only 6.5% were prescribed for 1 day. With the narrow definition, 15% of prophylaxis prescriptions were appropriate, which increased to 72% with the broader definition. Prophylaxis inconsistent with guidelines increased over time. For the narrow definition, Black (vs White) race, Latine (vs non-Latine) ethnicity, and visits located in the West census region were associated with unnecessary prophylaxis. Variables associated with a lower risk were older age, prosthetic joints, immunocompromising condition, and rural location.

CONCLUSIONS

Of every 6 antibiotic prophylaxis prescriptions, 5 were inconsistent with guidelines. Improving prophylaxis appropriateness and shortening duration may have substantial implications for stewardship. Guidelines should state whether antibiotic prophylaxis is indicated for extractions, implants, and immunocompromised patients.

Photodynamic Therapy in Endodontics: A Helpful Tool to Combat Antibiotic Resistance? A Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance has become a growing global problem where overprescription is a contributing factor for its development. In the endodontics field, complementary treatments, such as antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT), have been described to eliminate residual bacteria from the root canal space and reduce complications. The aim of this review is to describe the literature evidence up to now regarding the advantages, efficiency, and clinical outcomes of this therapy in endodontics as a possible tool to combat antibiotic resistance.

METHODS

A review of the literature from 2010 to 2021 was carried out using the PubMed and Web of Science databases. Two steps were taken: First, articles were compiled through the terms and MeSH terms "Photochesdmotherapy" and "endodontics." Then, a second search was conducted using "photodynamic therapy" and "antibiotic resistance" or "drug resistance, microbial."

RESULTS

A total of 51 articles were included for evaluation: 27 laboratory studies, 14 reviews, and 10 clinical studies. Laboratory studies show that aPDT achieves significant bacterial elimination, even against antibiotic-resistant species, and is also effective in biofilm disruption. Clinical studies suggest that aPDT can be considered a promising technique to reduce bacterial complications, and reviews about the issue confirm its advantages.

CONCLUSION

The benefits of aPDT in reducing complications due to its antibacterial effects means a possible decrease in systemic antibiotic prescription in endodontics. In addition, it could be an alternative to local intracanal antibiotic therapy, avoiding the appearance of possible antibiotic resistance, as no bacterial resistance with aPDT has been described to date.

Dental Plaque Microbial Resistomes of Periodontal Health and Disease and Their Changes after Scaling and Root Planing Therapy

The human oral microbial community has been considered a reservoir of antibiotic resistance. Currently, the effects of periodontitis and the scaling and root planing (SRP) treatment on the performance of antibiotic-resistant genes (ARGs) and metal-resistant genes (MRGs) in the dental plaque microbiota are not well characterized. To explore this issue, we selected 48 healthy-state (HS), 40 periodontitis-state (PS; before treatment), and 24 resolved-state (RS; after SRP treatment) metagenomic data of dental plaque samples from the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) database. NetShift analysis identified Fretibacterium fastidiosum, Tannerella forsythia, and Campylobacter rectus as key drivers during dental plaque microbiota alteration in the progression of periodontitis. Periodontitis and SRP treatment resulted in an increase in the number of ARGs and MRGs in dental plaque and significantly altered the composition of ARG and MRG profiles. Bacitracin, beta-lactam, macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin (MLS), tetracycline, and multidrug resistance genes were the main classes of ARGs with high relative abundance, whereas multimetal, iron, chromium, and copper resistance genes were the primary types of MRGs in dental plaque microbiota. The cooccurrence of ARGs, MRGs, and mobile genetic elements (MGEs) indicated that a coselection phenomenon exists in the resistomes of dental plaque microbiota. Overall, our data provide new insights into the standing of the distribution of ARGs and MRGs in oral microbiota of periodontitis patients, and it was possible to contribute to the understanding of the complicated correlations among microorganisms, resistomes, and MGEs. IMPORTANCE The emergence and development of resistance to antibiotics in periodontal pathogens have affected the success rate of treatment for periodontitis. The development of new antibacterial strategies is urgently needed to help control and treat periodontal disease, and dental plaque microbiome studies offer a promising new angle of attack. In this study, we investigated the dental plaque microbiota and resistomes in periodontal health and disease states and their changes after SRP therapy. This is the first analysis of the profile of the microbial community and antibiotic and metal resistance genes in dental plaque by the metagenomic approach, to the best of our knowledge. Monitoring the profile of these resistomes has huge potential to provide reference levels for proper antibiotics use and the development of new antimicrobial strategies in periodontitis therapy and thereby improve actual efficacy of the treatment regimens.

Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescription for Prophylactic Purposes among Italian Dental Practitioners: Results from a Cross-Sectional Study

The primary objective of this study was to investigate the pattern of antibiotic prescription for prophylaxis purposes among Italian DPs (dental practitioners). A nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted using a multi-stage sampling design. A structured questionnaire was used to collect socio-demographic data and information about antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) prescriptions for selected dental diagnoses and surgical procedures. The presence of an indication and appropriateness of AP were defined according to international guidelines. In total, 563 DPs answered the questionnaire (response rate 52.6%). The proportions of DPs who prescribed AP in the presence of an indication ranged from 39.1% for luxation injury with soft tissue trauma to 73.1% for dental implants, whilst DPs who prescribed AP in healthy patients ranged from 41.9% in luxation injury with soft tissue trauma to 70.3% for bone grafting. The course of AP reported by DPs was not consistent with the guidelines in 70.9% of explored procedures. A high proportion of AP prescriptions before dental procedures were unnecessary. This highlights the urgent need to incorporate recommendations for best practices into national and local protocols as soon as they are established. Specific antibiotic stewardship strategies targeted to DPs should be implemented and assessed for effectiveness in improving prescribing of antibiotics.

Characteristics Associated With Opioid and Antibiotic Prescribing by Dentists

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study is to identify county-level characteristics that may be high-impact targets for opioid and antibiotic interventions to improve dental prescribing.

METHODS

Prescriptions during 2012-2017 were extracted from the IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription database. Primary outcomes were yearly county-level antibiotic and opioid prescribing rates. Multivariable negative binomial regression identified associations between prescribing rates and county-level characteristics. All analyses occurred in 2020.

RESULTS

Over time, dental opioid prescribing rates decreased by 20% (from 4.02 to 3.22 per 100 people), whereas antibiotic rates increased by 5% (from 6.85 to 7.19 per 100 people). Higher number of dentists per capita, higher proportion of female residents, and higher proportion of residents aged <65 years were associated with increased opioid rates. Relative to location in the West, location in the Northeast (59%, 95% CI=52, 65) and Midwest (64%, 95% CI=60, 70) was associated with lower opioid prescribing rates. Higher clinician density, median household income, proportion female, and proportion White were all independently associated with higher antibiotic rates. Location in the Northeast (149%, 95% CI=137, 162) and Midwest (118%, 95% CI=111, 125) was associated with higher antibiotic rates. Opioid and antibiotic prescribing rates were positively associated.

CONCLUSIONS

Dental prescribing of opioids is decreasing, whereas dental antibiotic prescribing is increasing. High prescribing of antibiotics is associated with high prescribing of opioids. Strategies focused on optimizing dental antibiotics and opioids are needed given their impact on population health.

Trends in Australian dental prescribing of antibiotics: 2005-2016

BACKGROUND

Prescribing of antibiotics by dentists for surgical prophylaxis or as an adjunct to managing dental infections is a substantial part of the overall landscape for prescribed antibiotics in health care settings.

METHODS

We explored trends in the antibiotic prescribing patterns of Australian dentists over the 12-year period, 2005-2016. We obtained data on dispensed prescriptions of antibiotics from registered dentists subsidized on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.

RESULTS

Australian dentists were responsible for almost 7 million dispensed prescriptions of antibiotics over 12 years; an average of 24 prescriptions per year per dentist. The most commonly prescribed antibiotic was amoxicillin, followed by amoxicillin + clavulanic acid and metronidazole. These top three antibiotics constituted more than 80% of all antibiotics prescribed and their use increased dramatically over time. There was a large increase in the prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics over time, most of which occurred from 2011 to 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Excessive prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics runs contrary to national antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) initiatives and guidelines. Multifaceted educational strategies are essential to align prescribing with current best practice. High-level evidence to inform clear guidelines on antibiotic prescribing in dental infections, with audit and feedback, should reduce the inappropriate use of antibiotics in dentistry.

Antibiotics to prevent complications following tooth extractions

BACKGROUND

The most frequent indications for tooth extractions, generally performed by general dental practitioners, are dental caries and periodontal infections. Systemic antibiotics may be prescribed to patients undergoing extractions to prevent complications due to infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis on the prevention of infectious complications following tooth extractions.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register (to 16 April 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2020, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 April 2020), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 April 2020), and LILACS (1982 to 16 April 2020). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing tooth extraction(s) for any indication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently performed data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment for the included studies. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For continuous outcomes, we used mean differences (MD) with 95% CI using random-effects models. We examined potential sources of heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for key outcomes as high, moderate, low, or very low, using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 trials that randomised approximately 3206 participants (2583 analysed) to prophylactic antibiotics or placebo. Although general dentists perform dental extractions because of severe dental caries or periodontal infection, only one of the trials evaluated the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in groups of patients affected by those clinical conditions. We assessed 16 trials as being at high risk of bias, three at low risk, and four as unclear.  Compared to placebo, antibiotics may reduce the risk of postsurgical infectious complications in patients undergoing third molar extractions by approximately 66% (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64; 1728 participants; 12 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 19 people (95% CI 15 to 34) need to be treated with antibiotics to prevent one infection following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. Antibiotics may also reduce the risk of dry socket by 34% (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; 1882 participants; 13 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 46 people (95% CI 29 to 62) need to take antibiotics to prevent one case of dry socket following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. The evidence for our other outcomes is uncertain: pain, whether measured dichotomously as presence or absence (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.12; 675 participants; 3 studies) or continuously using a visual analogue scale (0-to-10-centimetre scale, where 0 is no pain) (MD -0.26, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.07; 422 participants; 4 studies); fever (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.79; 475 participants; 4 studies); and adverse effects, which were mild and transient (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.64; 1277 participants; 8 studies) (very low-certainty evidence).  We found no clear evidence that the timing of antibiotic administration (preoperative, postoperative, or both) was important. The included studies enrolled a subset of patients undergoing dental extractions, that is healthy people who had surgical extraction of third molars. Consequently, the results of this review may not be generalisable to all people undergoing tooth extractions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority (21 out of 23) of the trials included in this review included only healthy patients undergoing extraction of impacted third molars, often performed by oral surgeons. None of the studies evaluated tooth extraction in immunocompromised patients. We found low-certainty evidence that prophylactic antibiotics may reduce the risk of infection and dry socket following third molar extraction when compared to placebo, and very low-certainty evidence of no increase in the risk of adverse effects. On average, treating 19 healthy patients with prophylactic antibiotics may stop one person from getting an infection. It is unclear whether the evidence in this review is generalisable to patients with concomitant illnesses or patients at a higher risk of infection. Due to the increasing prevalence of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotic treatment, clinicians should evaluate if and when to prescribe prophylactic antibiotic therapy before a dental extraction for each patient on the basis of the patient's clinical conditions (healthy or affected by systemic pathology) and level of risk from infective complications. Immunocompromised patients, in particular, need an individualised approach in consultation with their treating medical specialist.

Effect of educational intervention on the appropriate use of oral antimicrobials in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a retrospective secondary data analysis

BACKGROUND

In Japan, oral third-generation cephalosporins with broad-spectrum activity are commonly prescribed in the practices of dentistry and oral surgery. However, there are few reports on the appropriate use of antibiotics in the field of oral surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of antibiotic use before and after an educational intervention in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kobe University Hospital.

METHODS

The use of oral antibiotics was investigated among inpatients and outpatients before and after an educational intervention conducted by the antimicrobial stewardship team. Additionally, the frequency of surgical site infection after the surgical removal of an impacted third mandibular molar under general anesthesia and the prevalence of adverse effects of the prescribed antibiotics were comparatively evaluated between 2013 and 2018.

RESULTS

After the educational intervention, a remarkable reduction was noted in the prescription of oral third-generation cephalosporins, but increased use of penicillins was noted among outpatients. There was reduced use of macrolides and quinolones in outpatients. Although a similar trend was seen for inpatients, the use of quinolones increased in this population. Despite the change in the pattern of antibiotic prescription, inpatients who underwent mandibular third molar extraction between 2013 and 2018 did not show a significant increase in the prevalence of surgical site infections (6.2% vs. 1.8%, p = .336) and adverse effects of drugs (2.1% vs. 0%, p = .466).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the judicious use of oral antibiotics is possible through conscious and habitual practice of appropriate antibiotic use. However, further investigation is required to develop measures for appropriate use of oral antibiotics.

Discrepancy in Therapeutic and Prophylactic Antibiotic Prescribing in General Dentists and Maxillofacial Specialists in Australia

There are concerns that general dentists (GDs) and dental specialists may be prescribing antibiotics inappropriately. This study explored the prescribing habits and decision-making processes of GDs versus oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFSs). A case-based online questionnaire was used to examine the prescribing of therapeutic and prophylactic antibiotics in two clinical scenarios. Stratified and systematic sampling strategies were implemented to provide a representative sample. The final valid sample was 60 GDs and 18 OMFSs. The majority of OMFSs (61.1%) routinely prescribed antibiotics for the surgical removal of third molars, which was significantly greater than for GDs (23.5%). For implant placement procedures, 72.2% of OMFSs and 62.1% of GDs prescribed antibiotics. Amoxicillin was the most selected agent for both scenarios. All OMFSs would prescribe antibiotic prophylaxis for patients with uncontrolled diabetes mellitus in both cases, but only 56.0–63.0% of GDs would do this. GDs based prescribing decisions primarily on information from prescribing guides, while OMFSs relied more on information gained from specialist training. Surgical prophylaxis protocols differed considerably between groups. Both groups used surgical prophylaxis for some situations that are outside current recommendations. Education with regards to discrepancies between clinical practice and current guidelines for antimicrobial therapy is needed to progress antimicrobial stewardship.

Pattern of antibiotic prophylaxis practice for dental procedures in children with congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Various antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines have been published such as the American Heart Association 2007, British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2006, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 2008, European Society of Cardiology 2015, and in Malaysia, the National Antibiotic Guideline 2014 and Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Infective Endocarditis 2017. The aim of the study is to determine the pattern of antibiotic prophylaxis practice for dental procedure in children with congenital heart disease (CHD) at the Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Kuala Lumpur Hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comparative cross-sectional study of dental records from 2010 to 2015 was done by collecting data on the source and reason of referral, types of heart condition, dental procedure, and antibiotic given.

RESULTS

There were 210 patients; 69.5% had acyanotic CHD, 21.9% cyanotic CHD, 6.7% repaired CHD with residual defects, and 1.9% with previous infective endocarditis. Slightly more than 58% were referred from government doctors (pediatric cardiologist and National Heart Institute). The common cause for referral was dental assessment (47.6%). Antibiotics were prescribed to 23.3% (49/210) patients, of which, 34.7% was given ampicillin or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid. About 96% of cyanotic heart cases undergoing invasive dental procedures were prescribed antibiotic prophylaxis. Almost 31% were prescribed with antibiotic prophylaxis even though it was not indicated.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that there is variability in prescribing antibiotic prophylaxis, and it is important for dental clinicians to standardize the practice of giving antibiotic prophylaxis.

Prescribing practices for antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with prosthetic joints

AIMS

With the increasing number of patients with prosthetic joints, recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) prior to dental procedures to prevent prosthetic joint infections (PJI) have changed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This survey evaluated dentists' AP practices for patients with prosthetic joints undergoing dental procedures and their familiarity with the American Dental Association Guidelines (ADA CPG) and American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Appropriate Use Criteria (AAOS AUC). Dentists' attitudes about antibiotic resistance, medical-legal aspects, and adverse effects to using AP were examined. Dentists (n = 574) were familiar (51.2%) with ADA CPG and with the AAOS AUC (25.8%). Familiarity varied according to years since graduation. Female dentists (63.5%) were more likely to be very familiar with the ADA CPG than male dentists (49.5%). Overall, 65.4% of respondents believed that AP is not effective in the prevention of PJI, and 19.4% believed there is enough evidence to support AP. For a healthy patient, 28.9% of dentists would never recommend AP, 44.9% would recommend AP within the first two years since prosthetic joint replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

Dentists' recommendations for the use of AP varied depending on different factors, including health status of the patient, dental procedure, time elapsed since joint surgery, suggesting that adherence to the ADA CPG and AUC is still challenging.

Attitudes of dental implantologists in Spain to prescribing antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in healthy patients

Background

The implantologists frequently prescribe antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in dental implant surgery. The aims of this study were to evaluate the attitudes of implantologists in Murcia (Spain) to prescribing antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in healthy patients during different implant dentistry procedures, and to see how these are influenced by individual dentist’s academic level, professional experience, and ongoing training (attending courses or reading scientific literature on medication use)

Material and Methods

This cross-sectional study included a total of 200 implantologists from the Murcia area (Spain), who each completed a two-page questionnaire consisting of 26 questions.

Results

The implant procedure in which most dentists (n=97) prescribed antibiotics was multiple implant surgery with flap raising, in which 55.6% of these 97 respondents used a prophylactic antibiotic regime for 7 days after implant placement. All subjects (n=200) prescribed analgesics for eight out of the eleven procedures included in the survey and anti-inflammatories in six. Dentists with higher academic levels or longer professional experience prescribed more antibiotics, but those who underwent continuous training (attending courses or reading scientific literature) reduced antibiotic prescription.

Conclusions

Dentists often prescribed antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in almost all implant procedures in healthy patients, but ongoing training reduced the frequency of antibiotic prescription in some procedures.

Key words:Antibiotics, analgesics, anti-inflammatories, dental implant, oral surgery.

Perceptions, attitudes and factors that influence prescribing by general dentists in Australia: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Longitudinal studies of dental prescribing in Australia show that dentists make some inappropriate prescribing choices; literature has shown that dentists tend to overprescribe antibiotics and prescribe for incorrect indications. The unnecessary use of antibiotics is a contributing factor towards the development of antibiotic resistance. The aims of the study were to obtain a greater understanding of the perceptions, attitudes and factors that influence dental prescribing for all major relevant drug classes.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews of 15 purposively sampled dentists practising in Victoria, Australia were conducted from June-September 2018. Two dentists practised in rural areas and the remainder in urban locations. The range of clinical experience varied from 2.5 to 37 years, with a mean of 13 years. The transcripts were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Dentists generally preferred amoxicillin as first-line therapy for odontogenic infections, with some confusion about the spectrum and uses of antibiotics. Overprescribing was evident, mostly due to basing judgement for use of antibiotics on symptoms rather than clinical signs. Other factors, such as time pressure, patient expectations, pressure from assistant staff, concern about online criticism and medico-legal considerations, influenced prescribing. Of the dentists who prescribed anxiolytics, most did not have a care protocol for their sedated patients.

CONCLUSION

A variety of prescribing practices were described, and future interventions should target misconceptions around the appropriate use and choice of antibiotics, resources to address the shortfall in knowledge of therapeutics, patient education and staff training, as well as appropriate care and monitoring of sedated patients.

Assessment of the Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescriptions for Infection Prophylaxis Before Dental Procedures, 2011 to 2015

Importance

Antibiotics are recommended before certain dental procedures in patients with select comorbidities to prevent serious distant site infections.

Objective

To assess the appropriateness of antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedures using Truven, a national integrated health claims database.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective cohort study. Dental visits from 2011 to 2015 were linked to medical and prescription claims from 2009 to 2015. The dates of analysis were August 2018 to January 2019. Participants were US patients with commercial dental insurance without a hospitalization or extraoral infection 14 days before antibiotic prophylaxis (defined as a prescription with ≤2 days' supply dispensed within 7 days before a dental visit).

Exposures

Presence or absence of cardiac diagnoses and dental procedures that manipulated the gingiva or tooth periapex.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis was defined as a prescription dispensed before a dental visit with a procedure that manipulated the gingiva or tooth periapex in patients with an appropriate cardiac diagnosis. To assess associations between patient or dental visit characteristics and appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis, multivariable logistic regression was used. A priori hypothesis tests were performed with an α level of .05.

Results

From 2011 to 2015, antibiotic prophylaxis was prescribed for 168 420 dental visits for 91 438 patients (median age, 63 years; interquartile range, 55-72 years; 57.2% female). Overall, these 168 420 dental visits were associated with 287 029 dental procedure codes (range, 1-14 per visit). Most dental visits were classified as diagnostic (70.2%) and/or preventive (58.8%). In 90.7% of dental visits, a procedure was performed that would necessitate antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk cardiac patients. Prevalent comorbidities include prosthetic joint devices (42.5%) and cardiac conditions at the highest risk of adverse outcome from infective endocarditis (20.9%). Per guidelines, 80.9% of antibiotic prophylaxis prescriptions before dental visits were unnecessary. Clindamycin was more likely to be unnecessary relative to amoxicillin (odds ratio [OR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.15). Prosthetic joint devices (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 2.22-2.41), tooth implant procedures (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.45-1.89), female sex (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17-1.25), and visits occurring in the western United States (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.06-1.25) were associated with unnecessary antibiotic prophylaxis.

Conclusion and Relevance

More than 80% of antibiotics prescribed for infection prophylaxis before dental visits were unnecessary. Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship in dental practices is an opportunity to improve antibiotic prescribing for infection prophylaxis.

Use of antibiotics by spanish dentists receiving postgraduate training in endodontics

BACKGROUND

The incidence of endodontic infections is high. The contribution of Endodontics to the global problem of antibiotic resistance could be significant. The ESE, together with the World Health Organization, are promoting the World Antibiotic Awareness Week (13-19 November 2017) to promote the appropriate use of systemic antibiotics in Endodontics. The objective of this study was to determine the prescription pattern of antibiotics in the treatment of endodontic infections of Spanish dentists attending specialization programs in Endodontics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Dentists from five Spanish endodontic postgraduate programs were requested to answer a one-page questionnaire surveying about antibiotics indications. Seventy-three dentists were required to participate in this investigation, and 67 (91.2%) fulfilled satisfactorily the survey and were included in the study. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi square test.

RESULTS

The average duration of antibiotic therapy was 6.8±1.2 days. All respondents chose amoxicillin as first choice antibiotic in patients with no medical allergies, alone (40%) or associated to clavulanic acid (60%). The first drug of choice for penicillin allergic patients was clindamycin (72%). For cases of irreversible pulpitis, 22% of respondents prescribed antibiotics. For the scenario of a necrotic pulp, symptomatic apical periodontitis and no swelling, 37% prescribed antibiotics. A quarter of dentists prescribed antibiotics for necrotic pulps with asymptomatic apical periodontitis and a sinus tract.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that postgraduate training in Endodontics provides greater awareness of the correct indications of antibiotics. Dentists who have received specialized training in Endodontics have a prescription pattern of antibiotics more adjusted to the guidelines recommended by international organizations and by scientific societies. Key words:Antibiotics, apical periodontitis, dental curriculum, endodontic infections, postgraduate endodontic training.

Part 1. Current prescribing trends of antibiotics by dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016

BACKGROUND

Literature has shown dentists tend to overprescribe antibiotics and do not always prescribe in accordance with recommended guidelines. Unnecessary prescribing is one major factor that contributes to the development of antibiotic resistance. The aim of the present study was to assess the antibacterial prescribing patterns of dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016.

METHODS

Data on dental antibacterial prescriptions dispensed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) from 2013 to 2016 was accessed and prescribing trends analysed. The prescribing rates were standardized to the dose and population.

RESULTS

There was a slight decrease in the dispensed use of most antibacterials from 2013 to 2016, but there was a significant increase in the dispensed use of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid of 11.2%. Amoxicillin was the most commonly dispensed antibiotic, accounting for approximately 65% of all antibacterials from 2013 to 2016, while phenoxymethylpenicillin accounted for only 1.4% of prescriptions in 2016. There were low but significant quantities of dispensed antibiotic prescriptions that do not fit with current guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The data suggest that dentists in Australia are prescribing some antibiotics inappropriately and there is a preference for moderate- to broad-spectrum agents. The current PBS dental schedule is inconsistent with prescribing guidelines and may contribute to inappropriate prescribing.

Dental Students' Knowledge and Attitudes towards Antibiotic Prescribing Guidelines in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Background: The use of antibiotics prophylactically and therapeutically in dentistry has become common practice. Inappropriate prescription may lead to adverse side effects and bacterial resistance. During clinical training, dental students in Saudi Arabia are authorized to prescribe antibiotics. Aim: To evaluate dental students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding antibiotic prescription in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional study based on a validated questionnaire consisting of 34 questions focusing on antibiotic indications in dentistry, antibiotic regimens, and knowledge regarding resistance was distributed amongst dental students in five leading dental colleges in Riyadh. Results: A large proportion of students (71.7%) were familiar with the concept of antibiotic resistance. When comparing junior and senior dental students’ knowledge with regards to indications of antibiotic use in commonly encountered conditions, it was found that there was no significant difference in antibiotic prescription frequency between these groups. Most dental students choose to prescribe amoxicillin as their first-choice of antibiotic (88.4%), and most also chose to use it for a duration of 3–5 days (69.2%). Conclusions: This study concludes that dental students may prescribe antibiotics inappropriately to manage various conditions when not indicated. This may indicate a defect in education of students with regards to current antibiotic guidelines.

Trends and racial/ethnic disparities in antibiotic prescribing practices of dentists in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine trends and racial/ethnic disparities in antibiotic prescribing practices of dentists in the United States.

METHODS

The US Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data for 1996-2013 was analyzed. Information on patient sociodemographic characteristics, dental visits, receipt of dental procedures, and type of antibiotics prescribed following visits was obtained. Descriptive statistics were calculated separately for each year. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify associations during the period with and without adjustment for dental procedures and sociodemographic characteristics. Survey weights were incorporated to handle the sampling design.

RESULTS

Nationally, the number of antibiotic prescribed at dental visits was estimated to be higher by 842,749 (0.4 percent) at year 2013 compared to the prescription level at 2003 were the population sociodemographic distribution kept at 2013 level. On average, the odds of prescribing antibiotics following dental care increased with each decade of study (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: [1.04, 1.17]) after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and receipt of dental procedures. Compared to Whites, Blacks had 21 percent (95% CI: 11%, 31%) higher odds of receiving a prescription for antibiotics from a dentist after adjusting for dental procedure and other sociodemographic characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The prescription of antibiotics following dental visits increased over time after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics and dental procedure. The probability of being prescribed antibiotics by dentists was higher for Blacks compared to Whites.

Use of Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Tooth Extractions, Dental Implants, and Periodontal Surgical Procedures

Background

Guidelines for antibiotics prior to dental procedures for patients with specific cardiac conditions and prosthetic joints have changed, reducing indications for antibiotic prophylaxis. In addition to guidelines focused on patient comorbidities, systematic reviews specific to dental extractions and implants support preprocedure antibiotics for all patients. However, data on dentist adherence to these recommendations are scarce.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study of veterans undergoing tooth extractions, dental implants, and periodontal procedures. Patients receiving antibiotics for oral or nonoral infections were excluded. Data were collected through manual review of the health record.

Results

Of 183 veterans (mean age, 62 years; 94.5% male) undergoing the included procedures, 82.5% received antibiotic prophylaxis (mean duration, 7.1 ± 1.6 days). Amoxicillin (71.3% of antibiotics) and clindamycin (23.8%) were prescribed most frequently; 44.7% of patients prescribed clindamycin were not labeled as penicillin allergic. Of those who received prophylaxis, 92.1% received postprocedure antibiotics only, 2.6% received preprocedural antibiotics only, and 5.3% received pre- and postprocedure antibiotics. When prophylaxis was indicated, 87.3% of patients received an antibiotic. However, 84.9% received postprocedure antibiotics when preprocedure administration was indicated. While the majority of antibiotics were indicated, only 8.2% of patients received antibiotics appropriately. The primary reason was secondary to prolonged duration. Three months postprocedure, there were no occurrences of Clostridium difficile infection, infective endocarditis, prosthetic joint infections, or postprocedure oral infections.

Conclusion

The majority of patients undergoing a dental procedure received antibiotic prophylaxis as indicated. Although patients for whom antibiotic prophylaxis was indicated should have received a single preprocedure dose, most antibiotics were prescribed postprocedure. Dental stewardship efforts should ensure appropriate antibiotic timing, indication, and duration.

Patterns of drugs prescribed for dental outpatients in Nigeria: findings and implications

OBJECTIVES

There are concerns with inappropriate prescribing of medicines among dentists especially antimicrobials. It is more concerning if this increases resistance rates. This study aimed to address this by assessing patterns of drugs prescribed for outpatients attending a hospital dental clinic in Nigeria. The findings will be used to plan future interventions, particularly around antimicrobial prescribing, where there are concerns.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Medical records of patients attending the dental clinic of a leading teaching hospital in Nigeria were evaluated. Patients referred for admission, without a prescription, or prescribed medicines without a documented diagnosis were excluded.

RESULTS

Overall, 607 prescriptions were analysed, 314 (51.7%) were for females. Periodontal and gum diseases (414; 68.1%) were the most frequent diagnoses, followed by pulpitis (49; 8.2%), and dentoalveolar abscess (43; 7.1%). A total of 1798 medicines were prescribed for all patients with a mean of 3.0 ± 0.48 medicines per prescription. Antimicrobials (1178; 65.5%) and analgesics (620; 34.5%) were the two drug classes prescribed. Ascorbic acid and vitamin B complex were prescribed for 361 (59.5%) patients. Among antimicrobials, amoxicillin (564; 95.1%) either alone or combined with clavulanic acid was the most frequently prescribed, followed by metronidazole (561; 94.6%). Brand name prescribing was also appreciably higher than WHO recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Polypharmacy, brand name prescriptions, and the frequent prescription of antimicrobials were common practices at the dental clinic of this teaching hospital in Nigeria. We suggest a review of the current standard treatment guidelines in Nigeria to guide dentists on current knowledge- and evidence-based treatment of common oral diseases.

Trends in antibiotic prescribing by dental practitioners in Germany

PURPOSE

To analyze the structure of antibiotic prescriptions by dentists in Germany during a time-period of four years in relation to medical antibiotic prescriptions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected nationwide data from all statutory health insurances on dental prescriptions of systemic antibiotics from 2012 to 2015. The annual reports of the "Research Institute for Local Health Care Systems" (WIdO, Berlin) provided the basis for this longitudinal data base analysis. The types of antibiotics, the number of prescriptions and the prescribed 'defined daily doses' (DDD) were analyzed. The results were compared to antibiotic prescriptions of German physicians.

RESULTS

An average of 8.8% per year of all antibiotic prescriptions is issued by dentists. The mostly prescribed antibiotic is amoxicillin. The share of amoxicillin on all dental prescriptions increased from 35.6% in 2012 to 45.8% in 2015 (p < 0.01). About three-quarters of all dentally prescribed DDD can be attributed to amoxicillin and clindamycin. On the part of the physicians the proportion of clindamycin is 18 fold lower than in the dental field.

CONCLUSIONS

Dental and medical antibiotic prescriptions in Germany show statistically significant differences regarding the shares of the prescribed antibiotics. In an international comparison the high proportion of Clindamycin in Germany is noticeable.

Worldwide pattern of antibiotic prescription in endodontic infections

BACKGROUND

Odontogenic infections, and especially endodontic infections, are polymicrobial, involving a combination of Gram-positive and Gram-negative facultative anaerobes and strictly anaerobic bacteria. Therefore, antibiotics can be used as an adjunct to endodontic treatment. However, most chronic and even acute endodontic infections can be successfully managed by disinfection of the root-canal system, which eliminates the source of infection, followed by abscess drainage or tooth extraction, without the need for antibiotics. The literature provides evidence of inadequate prescribing practices by dentists. The aim of this concise review was to analyse the worldwide pattern of antibiotic prescription in endodontic infections.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Wiley Online Database, Web of Science and Scopus. The databases were searched up to 13 March 2016 for studies in which dentists used systemic antibiotics to treat endodontic lesions and which reported data on the type of antibiotic prescribed and on the diagnosis of the endodontic disease treated.

RESULTS

The electronic and hand searches identified 69 titles, of which 25 were included in the final analysis. Amoxicillin was reported as the drug of choice for endodontic infections in most countries, and clindamycin and erythromycin were the choice for patients allergic to penicillin. Dentists worldwide prescribe antibiotics for non-indicated conditions, such as pulpitis.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotics are overprescribed for the management of endodontic infections. It is necessary to improve antibiotic-prescribing habits in the treatment of endodontic infections, as well as to introduce educational initiatives to encourage the coherent and proper use of antibiotics in such conditions.

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.

Antibiotic prescriptions in the community by type of provider in the United States, 2005-2010

OBJECTIVES

Although antibiotic prescriptions are decreasing in the United States, broad-spectrum prescribing is increasing. It is unknown if decreases observed in national antibiotic prescribing differ by provider group. Understanding prescribing trends over time by provider group can be helpful for customizing antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Therefore, the purposes of this study were to describe outpatient antibiotic prescribing by provider group overall and adjusted for population and number of providers. In addition, trends in prescribing by class and seasonal variation are described by provider group over 6 years.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional observation of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A population-level analysis of U.S. prescribing from 2005 to 2010 with the use of the IMS Health Xponent dataset.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Number and rates of prescriptions dispensed overall and by provider group.

RESULTS

The majority (81.0%) of antibiotics were prescribed by physicians, followed by dentists (10.4%), nurse practitioners (NPs; 4.5%), and physician assistants (PAs; 4.2%). The percentage of antibiotic prescriptions decreased for physicians, but increased significantly for NPs and PAs. Provider-based and population-based prescribing rates decreased for physicians and dentists and increased for NPs and PAs. Penicillins were prescribed most frequently by all provider groups, decreasing for physicians and dentists. Increased prescribing of broad-spectrum agents was observed for NPs and PAs. With the exception of dentists, antibiotic prescriptions were higher in winter than in summer, with the largest seasonal increase by NPs.

CONCLUSION

Over 6 years, antibiotic prescriptions overall and for broad-spectrum agents decreased for physicians and increased for NPs and PAs. Thus, increasing trends in the US of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions can be attributed to midlevel providers. Interventions should be designed to reverse increasing prescribing trends, especially of broad-spectrum agents prescribed by NPs and PAs. Stewardship efforts should also be targeted towards dentists, since this group prescribes a higher proportion of antibiotics compared with midlevel providers.

The Pattern of Antibiotic Prescribing by Dental Practitioners in Zagreb, Croatia

BACKGROUND

Bacterial resistance is considered a consequence of misuse or overuse of antibiotics. Dentistry significantly contributes to this increasing public health problem. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to examine the pattern of antibiotics prescribed by Croatian dentists in Zagreb area.

METHODS

Out of 220 Doctors of Dental Medicine (DMDs) from Zagreb 110 responded to survey. Prior to the research an ethical approval was obtained. Participants were directly contacted. The questionnaire consisted of two parts: general data on DMDs and the part concerning indications, duration, type and dosage of antibiotic therapy. Data were processed using MS Excel and SPSS for Windows, Version 17.0. Statistical significance was tested by Fisher's exact test, chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman's rank correlation at the level of statistical significance p<0.05.

RESULTS

During the period of two months, the doctors prescribed antibiotics to 1,500 patients, 690 (46%) were men and 810 (54%) women. The most often prescribed antibiotics were penicillin (72.5% of patients), represented mostly by amoxicillin in combination with clavulanic acid (57.6%). The most common indication for the prescribed antibiotics was periapical or periodontal abscess (44%). Definite clinical indication (71.2%) was stated as the most common reason for antibiotic prescription. Antibiotic therapy usually lasted 7 days (62.9%). The doctors prescribed daily doses of antibiotics according to the instructions for the use of specific drugs.

CONCLUSION

The examined subjects prescribe antibiotics according to the curriculum taught at the School of Dental Medicine for majority of types, doses and duration of the treatments, although antibiotics over-prescription in cases without medical indication was observed. The national guidelines on antibiotic regimens are required in order to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use.

Long-term outcomes of oral rehabilitation with dental implants in HIV-positive patients: A retrospective case series

Background

The existing information on oral rehabilitations with dental implants in VIH-positive patients is scarce and of poor quality. Moreover, no long-term follow-up studies are available. Hence, the aims of this study were to describe the long-term survival and success rates of dental implants in a group of HIV-positive patients and to identify the most common postoperative complications, including peri-implant diseases.

Material and Methods

A retrospective case series of HIV-positive subjects treated with dental implants at the School of Dentistry of the University of Barcelona (Spain) was studied. Several clinical parameters were registered, including CD4 cell count, viral load and surgical complications. Additionally, the patients were assessed for implant survival and success rates and for the prevalence of peri-implant diseases. A descriptive statistical analysis of the data was performed.

Results

Nine participants (57 implants) were included. The patients’ median age was 42 years (IQR=13.5 years). The implant survival and success rates were 98.3% and 68.4%, respectively, with a mean follow-up of 77.5 months (SD=16.1 months). The patient-based prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis were 22.2% and 44.4% respectively at the last appointment. Patients that attended regular periodontal maintenance visits had significantly less mean bone loss than non-compliant patients (1.3 mm and 3.9 mm respectively).

Conclusions

Oral rehabilitation with dental implants in HIV-positive patients seems to provide satisfactory results. In order to reduce the considerably high prevalence of peri-implant diseases, strict maintenance programmes must be implemented.

Key words:HIV infection, dental implants, oral implantology, complications, peri-implantitis, peri-implant diseases.

Antibiotic Prescription Knowledge of Dentists in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: An Online, Country-wide Survey

AIM

Dentists are probably contributing to the development of bacterial resistance to certain antibiotics. Campaigns to promote prudent use of antibiotics in dentistry are, thus, needed but require proper identification of dentists' knowledge gaps. The objective here was to comprehensively evaluate antibiotic prescription knowledge of dentists in Saudi Arabia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A link to an online, previously validated questionnaire was emailed to 5199 dentists registered with the Saudi Dental Society. The questionnaire comprised 42 scorable items measuring antibiotics prescription knowledge in five different domains in addition to nonscorable questions regarding first-choice antibiotics and previous attendance of a course/workshop about antibiotic prescription. Each correct answer was given one mark. Mean scores were calculated as percentages and categorized as good (> 80%), intermediate (60-80%), or poor (< 60%).

RESULTS

The response rate was 9.4%; however, only 373 (7.2%) fully completed the questionnaire. Around half of the participants (52%) reported prescribing amoxicillin/clavulanate as the first-choice antibiotic; 62% reported attending a course/workshop in the last 5 years. The average knowledge score was 69%, being highest for nonclinical indications (79%) and lowest for prophylactic use (56%). The worst per-item scores were noted for rheumatic heart disease (19%), trismus (28%), surgical extraction (30%), apicectomy (31%), and periodontal abscess (33%). Female dentists, dentists in governmental sector, and those with higher qualifications had significantly better knowledge.

CONCLUSION

The level of knowledge was hardly intermediate and several deficits were identified, indicating an urgent need for educational campaigns and provision of guidelines promoting rational use of antibiotics by dentists.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Irrational use of antibiotics by dentists can contribute to the problem of antibacterial resistance.

A Rapid and Sensitive Assay for the Detection of Benzylpenicillin (PenG) in Milk

Antibiotics, such as benzyl-penicillin (PenG) and cephalosporin, are the most common compounds used in animal therapy. Their massive and illegal use in animal therapy and prophylaxis inevitably causes the presence of traces in foods of animal origin (milk and meat), which creates several problems for human health. With the aim to prevent the negative impact of β-lactam and, in particular, PenG residues present in the milk on customer health, many countries have established maximum residue limits (MRLs). To cope with this problem here, we propose an effective alternative, compared to the analytical methods actually employed, to quantify the presence of penicillin G using the surface plasmon resonance (SPR) method. In particular, the PenG molecule was conjugated to a protein carrier to immunize a rabbit and produce polyclonal antibodies (anti-PenG). The produced antibodies were used as molecular recognition elements for the design of a competitive immune-assay for the detection of PenG by SPR experiments. The detection limit of the developed assay was found to be 8.0 pM, a value much lower than the MRL of the EU regulation limit that is fixed at 12 nM. Thus, our results clearly show that this system could be successfully suitable for the accurate and easy determination of PenG.

Antibiotics in dental practice: how justified are we

Antibiotics are prescribed by dentists in dental practice, during dental treatment as well as for prevention of infection. Indications for the use of systemic antibiotics in dentistry are limited because most dental and periodontal diseases are best managed by operative intervention and oral hygiene measures. The use of antibiotics in dental practice is characterised by empirical prescription based on clinical and bacteriological epidemiological factors, resulting in the use of a very narrow range of broad-spectrum antibiotics for short periods of time. This has led to the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in a wide range of microbes and to the consequent inefficacy of commonly used antibiotics. Dentists can make a difference by the judicious use of antimicrobials--prescribing the correct drug, at the standard dosage and appropriate regimen--only when systemic spread of infection is evident. The increasing resistance problems of recent years are probably related to the over- or misuse of broad-spectrum agents. There is a clear need for the development of prescribing guidelines and educational initiatives to encourage the rational and appropriate use of drugs in dentistry. This paper highlights the need for dentists to improve antibiotic prescribing practices in an attempt to curb the increasing incidence of antibiotic resistance and other side effects of antibiotic abuse. The literature provides evidence of inadequate prescribing practices by dentists for a number of factors, ranging from inadequate knowledge to social factors.

Antibiotic prophylaxis prescribing practices of dentists in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis is a serious complication that results in significant morbidity and mortality in susceptible patients. The guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis have been updated by the American Heart Association and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The antibiotic prophylaxis prescribing practices among dentists in Singapore are unknown.

AIM

To determine the specific infective endocarditis antibiotic prophylaxis prescribing practices of dentists in Singapore.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey was sent through an email link and by postal mail. Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS 19.0.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 458 dentists (34.3% response rate), of which 278 (65.9%) were general practitioners. The majority of respondents (39.8%) followed the American Heart Association 2007 guidelines and 30.2% followed cardiologists' recommendations. The accuracy of prescriptions for 13 cardiac conditions and 12 dental procedures were evaluated. The median number of accurate answers for cardiac conditions was eight for the American Heart Association 1999 guidelines, and four for the American Heart Association 2007 and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines, respectively. The median number of accurate answers for dental procedures was generally high, both for dentists who followed the American Heart Association 1999 guidelines (median = 10) and American Heart Association 2007 (median = 9) guidelines. Majority of respondents (82.8%) felt that developing a local guideline would be beneficial to the local dental community.

CONCLUSION

Dentists were accurate in their prescriptions of antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures, but not for cardiac conditions. It may be helpful to attain a consensus among local cardiologists and dentists to unify the antibiotic prophylaxis prescription practices in Singapore.

Antibiotic prescribing habits of dental surgeons in hyderabad city, India, for pulpal and periapical pathologies: a survey

Aim. To determine the antibiotic prescribing habits for pulpal and periapical pathology among dentists in Hyderabad city, India. Methodology. A total of 246 questionnaires were distributed to all the dentists registered with the local dental branch. Demographic details and questions regarding type and dosage of antibiotics prescribed for allergic and nonallergic patients were recorded. Inferential statistics were performed, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. The response rate for the study was 87.8%. Around 148 (68.5%) of respondents regularly prescribed antibiotics for endodontic management. The first antibiotic of choice for patients with no history of medical allergies was a combination of amoxicillin and metronidazole, followed by amoxicillin alone (29.1%). The first antibiotic of choice in case of allergy to penicillin was erythromycin. Necrotic pulp with acute apical periodontitis with swelling and moderate/severe preoperative symptom was the condition most commonly identified for antibiotic therapy (92.1%). Conclusion. The present study reveals that the overall antibiotic prescribing practices among this group of dentists were quite high, and there is a need for more educational initiatives to rationalize the use of antibiotics in dentistry.

Knowledge of antibiotics among dentists in Riyadh private clinics

INTRODUCTION

Dentists prescribe antibiotics for both therapeutic and prophylactic reasons to manage oral and dental infections. Antibiotic prescriptions can be associated with unfavorable side effects and the development of resistance.

AIM OF THE STUDY

A survey was conducted among dental specialists (DSs) and general dental practitioners (GDPs) at private dental clinics in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to assess their level of knowledge regarding the action of antibiotics, their use and misuse in oral conditions, systemic diseases and prophylaxis.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A total of 380 identical surveys that contained 32 questions were completed by DSs and GDPs in a supervised setting. Descriptive statistics were calculated to assess the overall knowledge of both DSs and GDPs, and their knowledge within each category of questions. Independent t-tests were used to ascertain whether there were significant differences between DSs and GDPs. A scatterplot diagram was used to test for a correlation between the years of experience of practitioners and their knowledge level.

RESULT

The response rate was 79.7%. An acceptable level of knowledge was attained by 85.5% of dentists and 42.2% just passed. The percentage of dentists with an acceptable level of knowledge regarding prophylaxis was 51%. The scores for overall information levels about antibiotics among both DSs and GDPs were close to 70%. The percentage of DSs with an acceptable level of knowledge on antibiotic actions was 69.2%, 90.7% for oral conditions and 66.7% for medical conditions, compared to 66.8%, 88.7% and 64.8%, respectively, for GDPs. No significant relationship was found between the experience and knowledge level.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the overall knowledge level of dentists about antibiotics is acceptable, but more focus should be given to their ongoing training regarding the pharmacological aspects, pertinent medical conditions and prophylactic use of antibiotics.

Endocarditis prophylaxis and congenital heart defects in the Norwegian Public Dental Service

AIMS

The aims of this study are (i) to assess how dental health workers of the Public Dental Service, PDS, carry out endocarditis prophylaxis related to dental treatment for children and adolescents with congenital heart defects (CHD) and to identify factors influencing their appropriate use of guidelines and (ii) to assess how dental health workers perceive any characteristics of patients with CHD.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was based on self-administered questionnaires mailed to all dentists and hygienists in the PDS in three Norwegian counties.

RESULTS

The response rates among dentists (n = 130) and dental hygienists (n = 54) were, respectively, 63% and 68%. The findings revealed an over-prescription of endocarditis antibiotics to patients with CHD. Most of the background variables investigated did not influence the responders' prescription decision for appropriate use of the current guidelines on the topic. The only significant factor was whether or not the respondent considered that the endocarditis prophylaxis guidelines were consistent and easy to follow. Compared with healthy children, dental healthcare workers felt less confident when providing dental treatment to children with CHD.

CONCLUSION

There is room for improved education about children with CHD in dentistry and dental education.

Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket)

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a complication of dental extractions and occurs more commonly in extractions involving mandibular molar teeth. It is associated with severe pain developing 2 to 3 days postoperatively, a socket that may be partially or totally devoid of blood clot and in some patients there may be a complaint of halitosis. It can result in an increase in postoperative visits.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of local interventions for the prevention and treatment of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) following tooth extraction.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 29 October 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 10), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 29 October 2012) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 29 October 2012). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. We also searched the reference lists of articles and contacted experts and organisations to identify any further studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of adults over 18 years of age who were having permanent teeth extracted or who had developed dry socket post-extraction. We included studies with any type of local intervention used for the prevention or treatment of dry socket, compared to a different local intervention, placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies reporting on systemic use of antibiotics or the use of surgical techniques for the management of dry socket because these interventions are evaluated in separate Cochrane reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently undertook risk of bias assessment and data extraction in duplicate for included studies using pre-designed proformas. Any reports of adverse events were recorded and summarised into a table when these were available. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. We followed The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines and reported dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For some of the split-mouth studies with sparse data it was not possible to calculate RR so we calculated the exact odds ratio instead. We used the GRADE tool to assess the quality of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials with 2570 participants met the inclusion criteria; 18 trials with 2376 participants for the prevention of dry socket and three studies with 194 participants for the treatment of dry socket. The risk of bias assessment identified six studies at high risk of bias, 14 studies at unclear risk of bias and one studies at low risk of bias. When compared to placebo, rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinses (0.12% and 0.2% concentrations) both before and after extraction(s) prevented approximately 42% of dry socket(s) with a RR of 0.58 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.78; P < 0.001) (four trials, 750 participants, moderate quality of evidence). The prevalence of dry socket varied from 1% to 5% in routine dental extractions to upwards of 30% in surgically extracted third molars. The number of patients needed to be treated with (0.12% and 0.2%) chlorhexidine rinse to prevent one patient having dry socket (NNT) was 232 (95% CI 176 to 417), 47 (95% CI 35 to 84) and 8 (95% CI 6 to 14) for control prevalences of dry socket of 1%, 5% and 30% respectively.Compared to placebo, placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) after extractions prevented approximately 58% of dry socket(s) with a RR of 0.42 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.87; P = 0.02) (two trials, in 133 participants, moderate quality of evidence). The number of patients needed to be treated with chlorhexidine gel to prevent one patient having dry socket (NNT) was 173 (95% CI 127 to 770), 35 (95% CI 25 to 154) and 6 (95% CI 5 to 26) for control prevalences of dry socket of 1%, 5% and 30% respectively.A further 10 intrasocket interventions to prevent dry socket were each evaluated in single studies, and therefore there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects. Five interventions for the treatment of dry socket were evaluated in a total of three studies providing insufficient evidence to determine their effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most tooth extractions are undertaken by dentists for a variety of reasons, however, all but three studies included in the present review included participants undergoing extraction of third molars, most of which were undertaken by oral surgeons. There is some evidence that rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% and 0.2%) or placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) in the sockets of extracted teeth, provides a benefit in preventing dry socket. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the other 10 preventative interventions each evaluated in single studies. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of any of the interventions to treat dry socket. The present review found some evidence for the association of minor adverse reactions with use of 0.12%, 0.2% and 2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses, though most studies were not designed to detect the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to mouthwash as part of the study protocol. No adverse events were reported in relation to the use of 0.2% chlorhexidine gel placed directly into a socket (though previous allergy to chlorhexidine was an exclusion criterion in these trials). In view of recent reports in the UK of two cases of serious adverse events associated with irrigation of dry socket with chlorhexidine mouthrinse, it is recommended that all members of the dental team prescribing chlorhexidine products are aware of the potential for both minor and serious adverse side effects.

Antibiotics to prevent complications following tooth extractions

BACKGROUND

The most frequent indications for tooth extractions are dental caries and periodontal infections, and these extractions are generally done by general dental practitioners. Antibiotics may be prescribed to patients undergoing extractions to prevent complications due to infection.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis on the development of infectious complications following tooth extractions.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 25 January 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1948 to 25 January 2012), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 25 January 2012) and LILACS via BIREME (1982 to 25 January 2012). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trials of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing tooth extraction(s) for any indication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for the included studies and extracted data. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. For dichotomous outcomes we calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For continuous outcomes we used mean differences (MD) with 95% CI using random-effects models. We examined potential sources of heterogeneity. The quality of the body of evidence has been assessed using the GRADE tool.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 18 double-blind placebo-controlled trials with a total of 2456 participants. Five trials were assessed at unclear risk of bias, thirteen at high risk, and none at low risk of bias. Compared to placebo, antibiotics probably reduce the risk of infection in patients undergoing third molar extraction(s) by approximately 70% (RR 0.29 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.50) P < 0.0001, 1523 participants, moderate quality evidence) which means that 12 people (range 10-17) need to be treated with antibiotics to prevent one infection following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. There is evidence that antibiotics may reduce the risk of dry socket by 38% (RR 0.62 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.95) P = 0.03, 1429 participants, moderate quality evidence) which means that 38 people (range 24-250) need to take antibiotics to prevent one case of dry socket following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. There is also some evidence that patients who have prophylactic antibiotics may have less pain (MD -8.17 (95% CI -11.90 to -4.45) P < 0.0001, 372 participants, moderate quality evidence ) overall 7 days after the extraction compared to those receiving placebo, which may be a direct result of the lower risk of infection. There is no evidence of a difference between antibiotics and placebo in the outcomes of fever (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.99), swelling (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.30) or trismus (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.71) 7 days after tooth extraction.Antibiotics are associated with an increase in generally mild and transient adverse effects compared to placebo (RR 1.98 (95% CI 1.10 to 3.59) P = 0.02) which means that for every 21 people (range 8-200) who receive antibiotics, an adverse effect is likely.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although general dentists perform dental extractions because of severe dental caries or periodontal infection, there were no trials identified which evaluated the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in this group of patients in this setting. All of the trials included in this review included healthy patients undergoing extraction of impacted third molars, often performed by oral surgeons. There is evidence that prophylactic antibiotics reduce the risk of infection, dry socket and pain following third molar extraction and result in an increase in mild and transient adverse effects. It is unclear whether the evidence in this review is generalisable to those with concomitant illnesses or immunodeficiency, or those undergoing the extraction of teeth due to severe caries or periodontitis. However, patients at a higher risk of infection are more likely to benefit from prophylactic antibiotics, because infections in this group are likely to be more frequent, associated with complications and be more difficult to treat. Due to the increasing prevalence of bacteria which are resistant to treatment by currently available antibiotics, clinicians should consider carefully whether treating 12 healthy patients with antibiotics to prevent one infection is likely to do more harm than good.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in noncardiac prosthetic device recipients

BACKGROUND

Secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis involves the use of ≥ 1 antimicrobial agent just prior to the time when a diagnostic/therapeutic procedure, which may induce infection, is to be performed. In the context of this article, antimicrobial agent(s) are administered to patients with ≥ 1 implanted prosthetic device in order to prevent metastatic seeding of the device(s) during bacteremia induced by a diagnostic/therapeutic procedure. Antimicrobial agents used in this context are only administered periprocedurally. Secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis of endocarditis in recipients of cardiac prosthetic materials (including valves, shunts, conduits, and patches) has been reasonably well established. However, secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis in recipients of other types of prosthetic devices has been the subject of much controversy, with a wide variety of recommendations being made.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article was to conduct a narrative review of the published literature on the topic of secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis in recipients of noncardiac prosthetic devices and make evidence-based recommendations for each type of device, where possible.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for English-language articles published from 1950 to the present (January 2012). Search terms included "prophylaxis," "antibiotics," "antimicrobials," "prosthetic devices," "prosthesis-related infections," "bacteremia," the names of the individual types of prosthetic devices, and the names of the individual procedures potentially inducing bacteremia. Articles dealing with any aspect relevant to this topic were eligible for review. The bibliographies of retrieved articles were also carefully scanned to identify any articles not previously identified.

RESULTS

Based on review of the available literature, secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis is justified in only a few specific circumstances. For recipients of prosthetic vascular grafts/stents, hemodialysis arteriovenous shunts, and ventriculoatrial/ventriculovenous shunts, prophylaxis is warranted during the initial 6 months, initial 6 weeks, and at all times after implantation/revision, respectively, when dental procedures capable of inducing high-level bacteremia are planned. Prosthetic joint recipients should receive prophylaxis in the following 3 circumstances: 1) patient is to undergo dental procedure(s) capable of inducing high-level bacteremia plus either the patient is still within 2 years of device implantation/revision or the patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for hematogenous prosthetic joint infection; 2) patient is to undergo genitourinary tract procedure(s) capable of inducing high-level bacteremia plus the patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for high-risk bacteriuria; and 3) patient is to undergo perforating dermatologic surgery on the oral mucosa or at skin sites at increased risk for surgical site infection plus patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for hematogenous prosthetic joint infection. The data are inadequate to justify secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis for recipients of other types of prosthetic devices. On the basis of 9 surveys of prescriber behavior, it is apparent that there exists, over a wide geographic area, a wide disconnect between clinical practice and the secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines issued by the professional organizations representing these prescribers. Antimicrobial agent overuse was especially problematic among orthopedic and colorectal surgeons, urologists, and family practitioners. Dentists and maxillofacial surgeons followed guidelines more closely.

CONCLUSION

Device-, procedure-, and patient characteristic-dependent factors elicited over many years have narrowed down the secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis recommendations for noncardiac prosthetic devices to a small number. Despite this, physician prescribers frequently do not follow prophylaxis guidelines established by their own professional organizations. Risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness studies have found that no prophylaxis is actually superior to universal prophylaxis, likely due to known antimicrobial toxicities, such as anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions and Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Much work remains in establishing and extending the scientific basis for secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis and transforming this knowledge into appropriate action by the clinician.