Aim: To review evidence for the treatments of gingival recession and root caries in older populations. Materials & Methods: A systematic approach was adopted to identify reviews and articles to allow us to evaluate the treatments for gingival recession and root caries. Searches were performed in PubMed, Medline and Embase, the Cochrane trials register and bibliographies of European and World Workshops. Observations: Gingival recession: We identified no articles that focussed specifically on older populations. Conversely, no evidence suggested that Miller class I and II lesions should be managed differently in older patients when compared to younger cohorts. Six systematic reviews included older patients and suggested that connective tissue grafts are the treatment of choice, alone or in combination with enamel matrix derivative. Root caries can be controlled at the population level by daily brushing with fluoride-containing toothpastes, whilst active decay may be inactivated using professional application of fluoride varnishes/solutions or selfapplied high-fluoride toothpaste. Active root caries lesions that cannot be cleaned properly by the patient may be restored by minimally invasive techniques. Conclusions: Gingival recession and root caries will become more prevalent as patients retain their teeth for longer. Whilst surgical (gingival recession) and nonoperative approaches (root caries) currently appear to be favoured, more evidence is needed to identify the most appropriate strategies for older people.

Supportive periodontal care is a crucial aspect of the management of chronic periodontitis and peri-implantitis and is inevitably a long-term commitment for both the clinician and the patient. The principal goals of supportive care are to achieve a high standard of plaque control, minimize bleeding and maintain pockets at less than 6 mm. Gain of attachment around natural teeth during supportive periodontal care has been reported, although gain of attachment and of bone during supportive care may be a more pragmatic and aspirational aim in the longer term. Furthermore, we occasionally see patients for whom, despite excellent home and professional care (surgical or nonsurgical), including the management of risk factors, supportive periodontal care appears to be failing and therefore for such patients the clinician needs to consider further management options. This review considers, in particular, the options of using local or systemically delivered antimicrobials to eradicate periodontal and peri-implant disease progression and discusses the extent to which culture and sensitivity testing before the prescription of systemically delivered antimicrobials may be a cost-effective alternative to prescribing 'blind'.

AimTo describe treatment and referral patterns and National Health Service resource use in patients with chronic pain associated with low back pain or osteoarthritis, from a Primary Care perspective.BackgroundOsteoarthritis and low back pain are the two commonest debilitating causes of chronic pain, with high health and social costs, and particularly important in primary care. Understanding current practice and resource use in their management will inform health service and educational requirements and the design and optimisation of future care.MethodMulti-centre, retrospective, descriptive study of adults (⩾18 years) with chronic pain arising from low back pain or osteoarthritis, identified through primary care records. Five general practices in Scotland, England (two), Northern Ireland and Wales. All patients with a diagnosis of low back pain or osteoarthritis made on or before 01/09/2006 who had received three or more prescriptions for pain medication were identified and a sub-sample randomly selected then consented to an in-depth review of their medical records (n=264). Data on management of chronic pain were collected retrospectively from patients’ records for three years from diagnosis (‘newly diagnosed’ patients) or for the most recent three years (‘established’ patients).FindingsPatients received a wide variety of pain medications with no overall common prescribing pattern. GP visits represented the majority of the resource use and ‘newly diagnosed’ patients were significantly more likely to visit their GP for pain management than ‘established’ patients. Although ‘newly diagnosed’ patients had more referrals outside the GP practice, the number of visits to secondary care for pain management was similar for both groups.ConclusionThis retrospective study confirmed the complexity of managing these causes of chronic pain and the associated high resource use. It provides an in-depth picture of prescribing and referral patterns and of resource use.

The side-effects of pain medication can prove problematic and affect compliance. Dr Mark Ritchie explains.

The first in a two-part clinical review of lower back pain.