No abstract

Objective Tooth pain among adolescents is a common event that impacts substantially on quality of life. The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of race in the tooth pain experience and associated care-seeking. Design A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted on 14–18 years from four different public schools in Kuala Lumpur. Socio-demographic, pain symptoms, and social impacts data were collected as well as medication use and visiting a dentist for tooth pain. Results Of 1473 questionnaires distributed, 1452 (98.6%) completed questionnaires were returned, with 269 (18.5%) reported having experienced tooth pain in the past 1 month. Those who identified as Indian (26.1%) were more likely to report tooth pain compared to Chinese (16.5%) and Malay (20.9%). In regression analysis, no factors were identified as independently associated with medication use, but Chinese and Indians compared to Malays, and those expressing difficulty sleeping were more likely to report visiting a dentist for treatment. Conclusion Racial variations in the tooth pain experience and care-seeking have been identified. This may be related to socio-economic status, but further research is needed on the role of culture-related care-seeking and accessibility of dental services.

Background. The present study was undertaken to determine the effect of local and systemic inflammation on the quantity and localization of gingival mesenchymal stem cells (gMSCs). Methods. Gingival samples were collected from 34 systemically healthy (group 1) and 10 consenting adult patients with type II diabetes mellitus (T2DM) (group 2), who had reported for various dental treatments, requiring excision of gingival tissues as part thereof. The tissue samples were further stratified into three categories: healthy gingiva, gingivitis-affected and periodontitis-affected. Samples mounted on slides were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&amp;amp;E) while CD105 antibody was used for immunohistochemistry staining. Immuno-positive cells were identified as gMSCs. Three gMSCpopulated areas in each sample were selected to determine the density of gMSCs. Results. The density of gMSCs was significantly higher (P<0.05) in sections of gingival tissues affected by gingivitis and periodontitis compared to those of normal gingiva. However, there were no significant differences in the densities of gMSCs in tissues of patients with T2DM and those of healthy subjects. Conclusion. Local inflammatory status appeared to increase the density of gMSCs. In the presence of periodontitis, an added low-grade systemic inflammation (T2DM) did not appear to affect the density of gMSCs.

Introduction. The purpose of this review is to compare randomized clinical trials evaluating the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) using different unsplinted attachment systems in 2-implant-retained mandibular overdentures (2IRMODs). A focus question (as per PICOS) was set as follows: does one particular unsplinted attachment system (I) compared with another (C) result in better patient-reported outcomes (O) in two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures (P) using randomized controlled trials (S)? Materials and Methods. A literature search was conducted in the PubMed MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases between November 2010 and October 2020. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on 2IRMOD using unsplinted attachment systems measuring patient-centered outcomes were selected. A total of 171 studies were identified in initial search, and 27 studies were shortlisted for full-text evaluation. A total of 5 studies were included for a systematic review. The risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 (RoB 2.0). Meta-analysis could not be performed as different studies evaluated different patient-reported outcomes, namely, satisfaction, quality of life, complications, preferences, or combinations of these. Results. A total of 23 patients received low-profile (self-aligning) attachments (in 2 studies), 69 patients received standard ball attachments (in 5 studies), 25 patients received telescopic (or conus) attachments (in 2 studies), and 20 patients received mini-ball attachments (in 1 study). Two studies compared ball attachments and low-profile attachments and revealed similar satisfaction and quality of life (QoL). Two studies compared ball attachments with telescopic attachments and revealed less patient satisfaction in telescopic attachments. A single study compared mini-ball attachments with standard ball attachments and showed no difference in patient-reported outcomes. Three studies were found to have a low risk of bias, and the remaining two studies had a high risk of bias. Conclusions. The standard ball, mini-ball, and low-profile attachments have no influence on PROMs in the normal interarch space. Inconclusive results were found in studies that evaluated PROMs using ball attachments versus telescopic attachments.