PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Paediatric dentistry”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
PubMed1996

Paediatric dentistry--what's new. A contemporary approach to the art and science of caries risk assessment.

Preventive dental care for children and adolescents has historically focused on fluoride therapy, oral hygiene and home care maintenance, simple dietary advice, and the placement of fissure sealants. Traditionally, dental caries has been regarded as a static phenomenon, eventuating in loss of tooth structure while the basis for treatment and management of this ubiquitous disease has essentially been mechanical. However, with current developments in new dental materials, techniques and preventive strategies, a more precise understanding and appreciation of the nature of the caries process is required. The development of dental caries is a common yet complex series of dynamic events under the influence of numerous inter-related biological, social, behavioural and psychological factors. It is now increasingly recognized that certain 'high risk' caries-susceptible individuals persist within our communities for whom preventive measures and restorative care alone are not enough to control the disease. This paper will discuss and outline current preventive concepts, individual risk factors, and dietary considerations which can be utilized in a contemporary approach to caries risk assessment.

Child↗
PubMed2003

Clinicians' choices of restorative materials for children.

BACKGROUND: Recently, there has been an expansion in the range of tooth-coloured restorative materials available. In 1999, the National Health and Medical Research Council recommended clinicians use alternatives to amalgam in children 'where appropriate'. METHODS: A three-part 29-item questionnaire was developed, tested in a focus group, and distributed to members of the Australasian Academy of Paediatric Dentistry (AA; paediatric dentists and paediatric dentistry postgraduate students; n=55), and the Australian and New Zealand Society of Paediatric Dentistry, Victorian Branch (SPD; general dentists and dental therapists; n=50). Participant information, material choices, and six hypothetical clinical scenarios were addressed. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 74 per cent. For both groups, the first ranked factor influencing choice of restorative material for vital primary teeth was child age, and caries experience for vital first permanent molars. For moderate-sized Class I and II restorations in primary molars, a tooth-coloured material was chosen by 92 and 84 per cent respondents respectively. For restoring two separate proximal lesions in a primary molar, 65 per cent chose a tooth-coloured material followed by a stainless steel crown (27 per cent; all AA members), then amalgam (8 per cent). The SPD respondents were significantly more likely to choose glass ionomer cement for Class I and II restorations and for restoring two proximal lesions (all p=0.000) in primary molars than AA respondents, who were more likely to choose composite resins/compomers or amalgam/stainless steel crowns for these restorations. Younger respondents (21-40 years) were significantly more likely to choose composite resins/compomers or amalgam/stainless steel crowns (p=0.048) than older respondents (41-65 years), who were likely to choose glass ionomer cement. CONCLUSIONS: For Class I and II restorations in primary molars, glass ionomer cement was the material chosen most frequently (SPD respondents); preference for amalgam or stainless steel crowns was low (both SPD and AA groups). The wide range of materials chosen for the hypothetical clinical scenarios suggests the need for guidelines on selection of restorative materials, and the need for longitudinal studies to follow actual clinical outcomes of the materials chosen.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

A survey of self-perceived educational needs of general dental practitioners in the Merseyside region.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the self-perceived educational needs of a randomly selected group of general dental practitioners (GDPs) in the Merseyside region (UK). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-seven GDPs were randomly selected from 850 in the region and asked to complete a self-evaluation questionnaire regarding their self-perceived educational needs. RESULTS: Seventy-five (86%) responded, of which 52 (69.3%) were male and 23 (30.7%) female. There was no significant difference in self-perceived knowledge in any of the dental disciplines when gender and period of time since qualification were used as predictor variables. The majority of the GDPs felt they had a good knowledge of restorative dentistry and dental radiography. Some of the GDPs felt they had poor knowledge in implant dentistry, oral medicine, orthodontics, dental sedation techniques, oral surgery, endodontics, periodontics and dental radiography. None of the respondents felt they had poor knowledge in restorative dentistry, prosthodontics and paediatric dentistry. Seventy-four (98.7%) of the responding GDPs were motivated to attend continuing professional development (CPD) courses because of an interest in a particular dental discipline and only one reported attending out of personal learning needs. Implant dentistry was indicated by 30 (40.0%) of the respondents as their training programme of choice. CONCLUSIONS: The respondents had high self-perceived knowledge of restorative dentistry, dental radiography, periodontics, endodontics, paediatric dentistry and prosthodontics. The respondents had low self-perceived knowledge of implant dentistry, orthodontics, oral medicine and dental sedation techniques. Of GDPs surveyed, 98.7% applied for courses they liked to attend, rather than needed to attend. Fifty-two per cent of male GDPs surveyed expressed a desire for training in implant dentistry.

Anesthesiology↗
PubMed2006

The use of general anaesthesia for the extraction of children's teeth. Results from two UK dental hospitals.

AIM: To study the reasons forgiving children a general anaesthetic (GA) for the extraction of teeth, in two different paediatric dentistry centres and to compare them with draft guidelines disseminated for discussion by the British Society of Paediatric Dentistry (BSPD). METHODS: Data were collected on children who required GA extractions over a two month period (1st may to 30th June 2004) at the Paediatric Dental Units of Liverpool University Dental Hospital (LUDH) and the University Dental Hospital of Manchester (UDHM). The information collected included date of birth, gender, date of referral, date of assessment and date of GA. The reason for the GA was noted in terms of the proposed BSPD guidelines for short GA. RESULTS: A total of 264 and 268 children required extractions under GA at LUDH and UDHM respectively. At LUDH the main reason in 189 (72%) children was severe pulpitis requiring immediate relief of pain where a child does not have the intellectual maturity to cope with treatment under local analgesia (LA). This was followed by failed extractions under LA in 53 (20%) children. This reason is not listed under the proposed BSPD guidelines. At UDHM the main reason for GA in 114 (42%) children was symptomatic teeth causing pain in more than two quadrants (or in two quadrants necessitating the use of bilateral inferior dental blocks). CONCLUSIONS: There were differences in the clinical rationale for GA between children attending the two centres. Further information is needed to refine the proposed guidelines on the use of GA for dental extractions in paediatric dentistry. The guidelines need to be flexible and updated to reflect changes in practice and service provision.

Anesthesia, Dental↗
PubMed2006

Attitudes about dental care among parents whose children suffer from severe congenital heart disease: a case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine attitudes and experiences of parents whose children have complex congenital heart disease (CHD) with respect to dental health information and advice, dental care, and service and to compare the results with data from an age- and gender-matched control group without any medical problems. SETTING: Faculty of Medicine (Paediatric Cardiology and Paediatric Dentistry), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. SAMPLE AND METHOD: Each group comprised parents of 33 children; the children's mean age was 9.4 years. All the cases and the controls resided in the county of Västerbotten, northern Sweden. Data were collected with a questionnaire with 20 joint questions to both groups and four additional questions to the CHD group. RESULTS: Of the 20 joint questions, significant differences were displayed in the following areas: the professional group that provided the parents with dental health information and advice (P < 0.01), attitudes to reception at the dental clinic, and experience of sedation before operative dental treatment (P < 0.05). Parents to 11 children with CHD who were patients at a specialist clinic for paediatric dentistry scored the reception at the dental clinic as excellent in nine cases and satisfactory in two, compared to excellent (3), satisfactory (11), decent (4), and poor (4) among those who were patients in general dental practice (P < 0.01). No statistically significant differences in educational level or in parental experience of dental health were noted between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Children with CHD in northern Sweden mainly receive their dental health information from a physician or a dentist, and healthy children mainly receive information from a dental hygienist indicating that children with CHD are given priority in the dental care system. Parental attitudes to reception in the dental service differed, and parents of healthy children scored the reception at the dental clinic better than parents of children with CHD. It is suggested that children with severe CHD should receive dental care in clinics for paediatric dentistry, particularly at early ages.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Good occlusal practice in children's dentistry.

The difference between paediatric dentistry and most other branches of dentistry is that in the child the occlusion is changing. Consequently 'Good Occlusal Practice' in children is a matter of making the right clinical decisions for the future occlusion. The clinician needs to be able to predict the influence that different treatment options will have on the occlusion when the child's development is complete.

Anodontia↗