INTRODUCTION Dentists are in a critical position to help patients quit smoking. This study analyses the effectiveness of Turkish dentists in smoking cessation as part of routine patient care. METHODS An in-person cross-sectional survey on previous dental visit experiences was completed by 226 patients recruited from the Department of Periodontology, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Turkey, from March 2019 to September 2019. The questionnaire included topics on patient’s smoking/quit characteristics, experiences on smoking cessation from their dentists, and willingness for the implementation of smoking cessation advice by dentists. RESULTS In all, 38% of the patients were current smokers, 8% were former smokers, and 68% tried to quit previously. Smokers demonstrated consistently higher scores for plaque index, gingival index, and probing depth, than former/non-smokers (p<0.05). Patients’ knowledge of adverse effects was high, and the patients presented a positive attitude toward receiving cessation activities from dentists (86.7%). A total of 89% responded positively to be asked about their smoking behavior. However, the dentists’ approach for cessation discussions did not go any further than listing the harmful effects. Only 32% of the patients were informed about side effects of smoking and one-third were encouraged to quit. In general, offering smoking cessation advice was relatively infrequent, and the majority of patients tried to quit smoking by themselves (76%) without using any nicotine replacement product (84%). CONCLUSIONS Smoking leads to oral health problems. Dentists in Turkey may ask their patients’ about their smoking habits but less frequently offer practical help to quit.

INTRODUCTION Investigations to explore the relationship between smoking and its oral manifestations are important to clinicians. Among these oral manifestations, periodontal diseases and dental caries have still a controversial association. This study aims to analyze the effect of smoking on periodontal disease and caries and their relevance to each other. METHODS Data on demographic and clinical features were retrieved from 7028 patients. Smoking status was categorized as a smoker, non-smoker, former smoker and passive smoker. Each patient received a diagnosis according to the new classification system for periodontal disease, in which periodontal disease is divides into stages (PS). The carries status was diagnosed by evaluating the decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMFT) index. RESULTS Of the patients, 66.6% were non-smoker women, whereas 53.7 % of passive smokers were women. Being a worker and having a Bachelor’s degree was associated with a higher likelihood of getting diagnosed with periodontal disease and caries in smokers. Smoking significantly influences periodontal disease severity and DMFT values (p<0.001). This becomes more evident in former smokers by showing the highest severe periodontal problems (PS3: 29.7% and PS4: 18.9%), and the highest DMFT mean (16.4 ± 7.4) Accordingly, persons having high DMFT had significantly the most severe periodontal disease, namely PS4 (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Smoking is associated with higher caries prevalence and more severe periodontal disease, and DMFT tend to increase with the severity of periodontitis in the same subjects.

Articles reporting research may be full length or brief reports. These should report original research findings within the journal's scope. Papers should generally be a maximum of 4000 words in length, excluding tables, references, and abstract and key points of the article, whilst it is recommended that the number of references should not exceed 30. Review PapersComprehensive, authoritative, reviews within the journal's scope. There are two types of review papers:-systematic review papers: respond to a specific research question, accrue from criterion-based selection of sources, include a quantitative synthesis and a statistical method (meta-analysis), and should adhere to PRISMA guidelines. Guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity should be noted in methods section. -narrative review papers: the research question may be broad, and the scope of this review is to discuss a specific topic and keep the readers up-to-date about it. This type of review does not necessarily include a methodological approach and its synthesis is usually qualitative. Narrative reviews should include in a developments section, with details regarding data sources used, keywords applied, time restrictions and study types selected. Developments should be based on actual review articles. All review papers should be generally less than 6000 words, excluding abstract, tables, figures and references. References should not exceed 50. Conclusion of the reviews should be specific and stem from the findings. Short ReportsBrief reports of data from original research. Short reports are shorter versions of original articles, may include one table or figure, should not exceed 1500 words, and it is recommended that the number of references should not exceed 15. Short reports are suitable for the presentation of research that extends previously published research, including the reporting of additional controls and confirmatory results in other settings, as well as negative results. Authors must clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building, both published and unpublished.