IntroductionStudies have investigated the relationships between chronic systemic and dental conditions, but it remains unclear how such knowledge can be used in clinical practice. In this article, we provide an overview of existing systematic reviews, identifying and evaluating the most frequently reported dental–chronic disease correlations and common risk factors.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of existing systematic reviews (umbrella review) published between 1995 and 2017 and indexed in 4 databases. We focused on the 3 most prevalent dental conditions and 10 chronic systemic diseases with the highest burden of disease in Germany. Two independent reviewers assessed all articles for eligibility and methodologic quality using the AMSTAR criteria and extracted data from the included studies.ResultsOf the initially identified 1,249 systematic reviews, 32 were included for qualitative synthesis. The dental condition with most frequently observed correlations to chronic systemic diseases was periodontitis. The chronic systemic disease with the most frequently observed correlations with a dental condition was type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Most dental–chronic disease correlations were found between periodontitis and T2DM and periodontitis and cardiovascular disease. Frequently reported common risk factors were smoking, age, sex, and overweight. Using the AMSTAR criteria, 2 studies were assessed as low quality, 26 studies as moderate quality, and 4 studies as high quality.ConclusionThe quality of included systematic reviews was heterogeneous. The most frequently reported correlations were found for periodontitis with T2DM and for periodontitis with cardiovascular disease. However, the strength of evidence for these and other disease correlations is limited, and the evidence to assess the causality of these disease correlations remains unclear. Future research should focus on the causality of disease links in order to provide more decisive evidence with respect to the design of intersectoral care processes.
BackgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is high on the UK public health policy agenda, and poses challenges to patient safety and the provision of health services. Widespread prescribing of antibiotics is thought to increase AMR, and mostly takes place in primary medical care. However, prescribing rates vary substantially between general practices. The aim of this study was to understand contextual factors related to general practitioners’ (GPs) antibiotic prescribing behaviour in low, high, and around the mean (medium) prescribing primary care practices.MethodsQualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 41 GPs working in North-West England. Participants were purposively sampled from practices with low, medium, and high antibiotic prescribing rates adjusted for the number and characteristics of patients registered in a practice. The interviews were analysed thematically.ResultsThis study found that optimizing antibiotic prescribing creates tensions for GPs, particularly in doctor-patient communication during a consultation. GPs balanced patient expectations and their own decision-making in their communication. When not prescribing antibiotics, GPs reported the need for supportive mechanisms, such as regular practice meetings, within the practice, and in the wider healthcare system (e.g. longer consultation times). In low prescribing practices, GPs reported that increasing dialogue with colleagues, having consistent patterns of prescribing within the practice, supportive practice policies, and enough resources such as consultation time were important supports when not prescribing antibiotics.ConclusionsInsight into GPs’ negotiations with patient and public health demands, and consistent and supportive practice-level policies can help support prudent antibiotic prescribing among primary care practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.