Objective: To determine the difference in level of dental caries in adults and children who chew sugar-free gum (SFG), compared with those who do not chew SFG or use alternatives such as lozenges, candies, rinses, tablets, and other nonchewing controls. Methods: Systematic review of published literature. Results: Twelve studies of interventions of SFG for dental caries outcomes were included. SFGs were found to significantly reduce caries increment, giving a preventative fraction (PF) of 28% (95% CI, 7% to 48%). Including the 8 trials that used xylitol gum only as the basis of the intervention, the PF was 33% (95% CI, 4% to 61%). No adverse effects were recorded. There was a high level of heterogeneity among the trials included. Conclusion: The findings of this review provide tentative evidence that chewing SFG reduces caries increment in comparison to nonchewing controls. However, there is a considerable degree of variability in the effect and the trials included were generally of moderate quality. There is a need for future research to explore the acceptability and feasibility of the use of SFG as a public health intervention (PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018094676). Knowledge Transfer Statement: The results of this study can be used by clinicians when deciding how best to implement dental caries prevention regimes for their patients. With consideration of cost and patient preference, this information could help to develop national policy directives on caries prevention and dictate the direction of future clinical research.

The Covid-19 pandemic made it necessary to adopt and establish complete or partial online delivery of our clinical teaching and learning. We developed an alternative approach with a combination of Problem based Learning asynchronous fora and Teacher-facilitated synchronous online discussions. Our aim is to share our educational practice and highlight the requirements and constraints, advantages and challenges of such an approach. It allowed a more student-centred experience, but clinical simulation and face-to-face patient care remain necessary. The Covid-19 pandemic has changed the landscape of dental education for the foreseeable future, with a reduced number of patients in dental clinics. Further study is therefore necessary to understand the lived experience of students and teachers to the adopted online teaching and learning approach.

Aims: This study aimed to identify the risk factors of using DSM to provide an insight into the inherent implications this has on dental professionals in practice and trainee professionals’ education. Materials and methods: Twenty-one participants (10 dental professionals and 11 undergraduate and postgraduate dental students) participated in this qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in a dental school in the UK. The interviews were analysed and categorised into themes, some of which were identified from previous literature (e.g., privacy and psychological risks) and others emerged from the data (e.g., deceptive and misleading information). Results: The thematic analysis of interview transcripts identified nine perceived risk themes. Three themes were associated with the use of DSM in the general context, and six themes were related to the use of DSM in professional and education context. Conclusions: This study provided evidence to understand the risk factors of using DSM in dental education and the profession, but the magnitude of these risks on the uptake and usefulness of DSM needs to be assessed.

If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.

Background Preventive strategies targeting Streptococcus mutans may be effective in reducing the global burden of caries. The aim of the current systematic review of published literature was to determine the difference in level of Streptococcus mutans in adults and children who chew sugar-free gum (SFG), compared with those who did not chew gum, who chewed a control gum or received alternatives such as probiotics or fluoride varnish. Methods Systematic review (PROSPERO registration No. CRD42018094676) of controlled trials with adult and child participants where chewing of SFG was the main intervention. Databases searched (1 Jan 1946 to 31 August 2020): MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Allied and Complimentary Medicine Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Open Grey, PROSPERO and the Cochrane library of systematic reviews. ‘Search terms included Medical Subject Headings, and free text to cover the following range of constructs: chewing gum, sugar free, oral health, caries, xerostomia, periodontal disease. Data extraction and Risk of Bias assessment was undertaken by three researchers using a modified version of the Cochrane RoB tool (version 1). Data synthesis was conducted using meta-analysis in STATA. Results Thirteen studies of SFG with micro-organisms as outcomes were identified. The use of SFG significantly reduced the load of Streptococcus mutans (effect size − 0.42; 95% CI − 0.60 to − 0.25) compared to all controls. In seven of the 13 studies the confidence intervals of the effect size estimate included zero, suggesting no effect of the intervention. Twelve trials used xylitol gum only as the basis of the intervention; xylitol gum significantly reduced the load of Streptococcus mutans (effect size − 0.46; 95% CI − 0.64 to − 0.28) in comparison to all controls. There was a moderate level of heterogeneity across the included studies. No adverse effects were recorded. Conclusion Chewing SFG reduces the load of Streptococcus mutans in the oral cavity in comparison to non-chewing controls. Considering the degree of variability in the effect and the moderate quality of the trials included, there is a need for future research exploring the use SFG as a preventive measure for reducing the cariogenic oral bacterial load.