No abstract

BackgroundScreening ultrasonography was proposed for monitoring periodontal soft tissues in the early 1960s, owing to its nonionizing, real‐time, and cost‐effective properties. Studies have provided convincing preliminary evidence for the use of ultrasound (US) in implant dentistry.PurposeTo assess the feasibility of ultrasonography (US) for measuring the buccal thickness of periodontal and peri‐implant tissues. The secondary objective was to evaluate the reliability of US measurements compared to classic techniques, such as CBCT and directly measurements.Materials and MethodsAn electronic literature search was conducted by three independent reviewers through February 2023. The inclusion criteria were articles investigating at least five patients/cadavers with US measurements in periodontal or peri‐implant buccal tissues. Compliance with methodological reporting standards and risk of bias was assessed using EULAR and QUADAS‐C tools, respectively. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was conducted, using Bland–Altman analysis. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.ResultsThe final selection included 12 studies examining 458 patients and 13 cadavers, with a total of 226 implants, 1958 teeth and 60 edentulous sites. The body of evidence was assessed as partially compliant with methodological reporting standards for US studies and had an unclear to high risk of bias. Meta‐analysis of five comparative studies showed no evidence of clinically significant bias between US and direct measurements (very low certainty), and between US and CBCT (very low certainty) for soft‐tissue thickness. Likewise, for bone thickness, there is no evidence of clinically significant bias between US and CBCT (low certainty).ConclusionsCompared to the CBCT and direct measurements, ultrasonography might be a reliable approach for monitoring on periodontal and peri‐implant phenotype. However, there is uncertainty about estimates of the actual effect, so further standardized and larger sample size of clinical research is needed.

No abstract

Objetivo: Describir el rol de la Salud Oral en las estrategias nacionales y políticas sanitarias para el manejo integral y control de Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 (DM2) en los 38 Estados miembros de la Organización para la Cooperación y Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). Materiales y Método: Se realizó una revisión sistemática exploratoria, siguiendo la pauta PRISMA-ScR. Se incluyeron reportes gubernamentales, guías de práctica clínica, documentos oficiales OMS y OCDE, y artículos identificados en PubMED y LiLACS hasta diciembre de 2020. Se sintetizó: 1) Inclusión de la Salud Oral en planes nacionales o guías clínicas de DM2, 2) Prestaciones y cobertura odontológica para DM2 y 3) Indicadores de salud asociados al control de DM2. Resultados: 84 documentos fueron incluidos. 1) La Salud Oral está incorporada en los planes nacionales de 22 países OCDE para el control de DM2. 2) De estos, 8 garantizan la atención odontológica con alta cobertura para DM2. 3) Países OCDE con alta cobertura odontológica presentan los mejores indicadores de control metabólico de DM2. Conclusiones: En el marco de la Salud Global, países que no tienen integrada la salud oral podrían beneficiarse si incorporan la atención odontológica con cobertura universal en el manejo integral y control de la DM2.

BackgroundThe Decade of Healthy Aging 2021‐2030 calls for a strengthening of the policies for older people in Latin America. An example of successful oral aging is the Japanese “8020” campaign, which achieved 50% of people aged 80 years having ≥20 teeth by 2016.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between having a functional dentition (≥20 teeth) and cognitive health, social participation, and quality of life in people aged ≥80 years.MethodsCross‐sectional data from 299 complete observations (weighted N = 436 981) of individuals aged ≥80 years from Chile's National Health Survey 2016‐2017 were included (3% of the population; total = 5520 clinical observations/weighted N = 14 518 969). Generalised structural equation models (GSEM) evaluated the association between having a functional dentition and cognitive health, measured with the Mini‐mental score, between having a functional dentition and social participation, and between having a functional dentition and quality of life, measured with the EQ‐5D‐3L. Models included the effect of mediators (daily fruit and vegetable consumption; oral health‐related quality of life score) and controlled for the exposure‐induced mediator‐outcome variables: sex, educational level, and location. Data were analysed using the STATA‐17 survey module. Statistical significance was set at P < .05 (95% confidence interval [CI]).ResultsThe sample was mostly female, had <8 years of education, and lived in urban areas. The prevalence of a functional dentition was 9.2% (95% CI 3.6,21.3/n = 21). GSEM demonstrated that the association between functional dentition and cognitive health was mediated by daily fruits and vegetables consumption (β = 0.12/95% CI 0.02,0.21/P = .015), with moderate strength of evidence. Additionally, there was strong evidence of an association between functional dentition and social participation frequency (β = 2.76/95% CI 0.60,4.73/P = .009). Finally, the association between functional dentition and quality of life was mediated by cognitive health (β =0.05/95% CI 0.02,0.09/P = .002) and oral health‐related quality of life (β = −0.04/95% CI −0.08 to −0.01/P = .025), with strong and moderate evidence, respectively.ConclusionGiven the beneficial implications of functional dentition in social participation, nutritional benefits and quality of life and well‐being of individuals aged ≥80 years.