Oral diseases are among the most prevalent diseases globally and have serious health and economic burdens, depriving people of health, wellbeing, and the ability to achieve their full potential. By virtue of their high prevalence, the most consequential oral diseases affecting global health are: dental caries, periodontal disease, tooth loss, and cancers of the lips and oral cavity. In this first of two papers, we describe the scope of the global oral disease epidemic, describe its origins in social and commercial determinants, and its costs in terms of human suffering and societal impact. Even though oral diseases are largely preventable, they persist with high prevalence as a reflection of pervasive social and economic inequalities, along with inadequate funding for prevention and treatment, particularly in low and middleincome countries (LMIC). As with most non-communicable diseases (NCDs), oral conditions are chronic and strongly socially patterned. Poor children, socially marginalised groups, and older people suffer the most from oral diseases and have more limited access to dental care. In many LMIC oral diseases remain largely untreated as the treatment costs exceed available resources. The personal consequences of chronic untreated oral diseases are often severe and include unremitting pain, sepsis, reduced quality of life, lost school days, family disruption, and decreased work productivity. The societal costs of treating oral diseases are a very high economic burden to families and the health care system. Oral diseases are truly a global public health problem with particular concern over rising prevalence in many LMIC linked to wider social, economic and commercial changes. By describing the extent and consequences of oral diseases, their roots in social and commercial determinants, and their ongoing neglect in global health policy, we aim to highlight the urgency of addressing oral diseases as a global health and NCD priority. 4 Key messages  Oral health is an integral element of overall health and wellbeing enabling individuals to perform essential daily functions.  Oral diseases include a range of chronic clinical conditions that affect the teeth and mouth including dental caries (tooth decay), periodontal (gum) disease and oral cancers.  Despite being largely preventable, oral diseases are highly prevalent conditions affecting over 3.5 billion people around the world, with dental caries being the most common disease globally with increasing prevalence in many low and middle-income countries (LMIC)  Oral diseases disproportionally affect poorer and marginalised groups in society being very closely linked to socioeconomic status and the broader social determinants of health.  Oral diseases have a significant impact causing pain, sepsis, reduced quality of life, lost school days, family disruption, decreased work productivity, and the costs of dental treatment can be considerable for both individuals, and the wider health care system.  Oral conditions share common risks with other non-communicabl...

75Oral diseases are a major global public health problem affecting over 3.5 billion people. 76Dentistry however has failed to tackle this problem. A fundamentally different approach is 77 now needed. In this second paper on oral health, we present a critique of dentistry 78 highlighting its key limitations and the urgent need for system reform. In high-income 79 countries (HIC) the current treatment-dominated, increasingly high-tech, interventionist and 80 specialised approach, is failing to tackle the underlying causes of disease and is not 81 addressing oral health inequalities. In low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) the 82 limitations of "westernised" dentistry are most acutedentistry is often unavailable, 83 unaffordable and inappropriate to the majority of these populations, but particularly the rural 84 poor. Rather than being isolated and separated from the mainstream health care system, 85 dentistry needs to be more integrated with primary care services in particular. The global 86 drive for universal health coverage (UHC) provides an ideal opportunity for this. Dental care 87 systems should focus more on promoting and maintaining oral health and achieving greater 88 oral health equity, rather than the interventionist treatment approach that currently dominates. 89Sugar, alcohol and tobacco use and their driving social and commercial determinants are the 90 underlying causes of oral diseases, common risks shared with a range of other non-91 communicable diseases (NCDs). Coherent and comprehensive regulation and legislation is 92 needed to tackle these shared risk factors. In this paper we focus on the need to reduce sugars 93 consumption through the adoption of a range of upstream policies designed to combat the 94 corporate strategies used by the global sugar industry to promote sugar consumption and 95 profits. At present the sugar industry is influencing dental research, oral health policy and 96 professional organisations through its well-developed corporate strategies. There is a pressing 97 need to develop clearer and more transparent conflict of interest policies and procedures to 98 limit and clarify the influence of the sugar industry on research, policy and practice. 99

BackgroundInformation on the impact of oral health on quality of life of children younger than 8 years is mostly based on parental reports, as methodological and conceptual challenges have hindered the development of relevant validated self-reported measures. This study aimed to develop and assess the reliability and validity of a new self-reported oral health related quality of life measure, the Scale of Oral Health Outcomes for 5-year-old children (SOHO-5), in the UK.MethodsA cross-sectional study of two phases. First, consultation focus groups (CFGs) with parents of 5-year-olds and review by experts informed the development of the SOHO-5 questionnaire. The second phase assessed its reliability and validity on a sample of grade 1 (5-year-old) primary schoolchildren in the Greater Glasgow and Clyde area, Scotland. Data were linked to available clinical oral health information and analysis involved associations of SOHO-5 with subjective and clinical outcomes.ResultsCFGs identified eating, drinking, appearance, sleeping, smiling, and socialising as the key oral impacts at this age. 332 children participated in the main study and for 296 (55% girls, mean d3mft: 1.3) clinical data were available. Overall, 49.0% reported at least one oral impact on their daily life. The most prevalent impacts were difficulty eating (28.7%), difficulty sleeping (18.5%), avoiding smiling due to toothache (14.9%) and avoiding smiling due to appearance (12.5%). The questionnaire was quick to administer, with very good comprehension levels. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.74 and item-total correlation coefficients ranged between 0.30 and 0.60, demonstrating the internal consistency of the new measure. For validity, SOHO-5 scores were significantly associated with different subjective oral health outcomes (current toothache, toothache lifetime experience, satisfaction with teeth, presence of oral cavities) and an aggregate measure of clinical and subjective oral health outcomes. The new measure also discriminated between different clinical groups in relation to active caries, pulp involvement, and dental sepsis.ConclusionsThis is the first study to develop and validate a self-reported oral health related quality of life measure for 5-year-old children. Initial reliability and validity findings were very satisfactory. SOHO-5 can be a useful tool in clinical studies and public health programs.

No abstract

The objectives of this study were to determine how salivary flow rate and pH vary with time during use of chewing-gums and lozenges. Twenty-four young adults collected unstimulated saliva and then, on different occasions, chewed one of six flavoured gums, or gum base, or sucked on one of two lozenges, for 20 min, during which time eight separate saliva samples were collected. Flow rate peaked during the 1st minute of stimulation with all nine products. With the lozenges, flow rate fell towards he unstimulated rate when the lozenges had dissolved. There were no significant differences in the flow rates elicited by cinnamon- or peppermint-flavoured gums or between sugar-containing or sugar-free gums. With the flavoured gums, the mean flow rate followed a power curve (r = -0.992) with time and within about 10 min was not significantly different from that when gum base was the stimulus. The initial stimulated flow rate with flavoured gums was about 10-12 times greater than the unstimulated rate (0.47 ml/min). After 20 min of chewing, it was still about 2.7 times that rate and about the same as the flow rate elicited by chewing-gum base alone. The pH of unstimulated saliva was about 6.95. With one gum containing about 1.5% organic acids, the salivary pH fell to a minimum of 6.18 in the 1st minute of stimulation, but then rose rapidly to a level above that in unstimulated saliva. With a sucrose-containing and a sucrose-free gum, the pH rose immediately on stimulation and then fell slightly with time to levels which were significantly above the pH of unstimulated saliva.