Melbourne Dental School - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableTo prescribe or not to prescribe? A review of the Prescribing Competencies Framework for dentistry(ELSEVIER SCI LTD, 2023-10)OBJECTIVES: Dentists in Australia are the second largest prescriber group, and are generally not formally taught how to prescribe. The objective of this review is to describe the Prescribing Competencies Framework and its relevance to dentistry. DATA: The four-model stage of prescribing by Coombes and colleagues, and the seven competencies within the Prescribing Competencies Framework devised by the Australian National Prescribing Service MedicineWise, are discussed and applied to dentistry. SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Each of the seven competencies are analysed and detailed in the context of clinical dental practice. Competencies 1-5 describe the skillset and tasks required by dentists to safely prescribe, whereas Competencies 6 and 7 describe the clinical environment and recommended resources to support dentists to prescribe safely and effectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Prescribing Competencies Framework provides an overview of safe and effective prescribing. Prescribing is a process, and a separate skillset to clinical dentistry. The process involves information gathering, clinical assessment, effective communication and review of the patient. Access to timely and appropriate resources and relevant electronic sources of health information for clinicians are important to provide the support required for better informed prescribing decisions. The framework describes a patient-centered prescribing process, and ultimately prescribing should be a shared decision between the dentist and the patient. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Safe and effective prescribing is an integral part of dentistry and dentists are the second largest prescriber group. However, dentists display high rates of inappropriate and unnecessary prescribing, and to minimise errors, the Prescribing Competencies Framework has been established. This article details how the Framework applies to clinical practice dentistry.
-
Item
-
ItemOral manifestations of illicit drug use(WILEY, 2019-09)The use of illicit and misuse of licit drugs is a global public health problem, with illicit drug use being responsible for 1.8% of the total disease burden in Australia in 2011. Oral adverse effects associated with illicit drug use are well-established, with aggressive caries, periodontitis, bruxism, poor oral hygiene and general neglect documented. Other factors such as a high cariogenic diet and lifestyle, social and psychological factors compound the poorer oral health in illicit drug users. Literature has shown that the oral health-related quality of life among injecting drug users is poorer compared with the Australian general population and the overall quality of life of addicted people correlates with caries experience. Thus, the role of the dentist is imperative in managing the oral health of these individuals. Given their widespread recreational use, it is likely that dental practitioners will encounter patients who are regular or past users of illicit drugs. The aim of this article is to describe the prevalence and mechanism of action of commonly used illicit drugs in Australia, including cannabis, methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin and to inform dentists about the common orofacial presentations of their side effects to help with patient management.
-
ItemPerceptions, attitudes and factors that influence prescribing by general dentists in Australia: A qualitative study(WILEY, 2019-08)BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies of dental prescribing in Australia show that dentists make some inappropriate prescribing choices; literature has shown that dentists tend to overprescribe antibiotics and prescribe for incorrect indications. The unnecessary use of antibiotics is a contributing factor towards the development of antibiotic resistance. The aims of the study were to obtain a greater understanding of the perceptions, attitudes and factors that influence dental prescribing for all major relevant drug classes. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews of 15 purposively sampled dentists practising in Victoria, Australia were conducted from June-September 2018. Two dentists practised in rural areas and the remainder in urban locations. The range of clinical experience varied from 2.5 to 37 years, with a mean of 13 years. The transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Dentists generally preferred amoxicillin as first-line therapy for odontogenic infections, with some confusion about the spectrum and uses of antibiotics. Overprescribing was evident, mostly due to basing judgement for use of antibiotics on symptoms rather than clinical signs. Other factors, such as time pressure, patient expectations, pressure from assistant staff, concern about online criticism and medico-legal considerations, influenced prescribing. Of the dentists who prescribed anxiolytics, most did not have a care protocol for their sedated patients. CONCLUSION: A variety of prescribing practices were described, and future interventions should target misconceptions around the appropriate use and choice of antibiotics, resources to address the shortfall in knowledge of therapeutics, patient education and staff training, as well as appropriate care and monitoring of sedated patients.
-
ItemA review and guide to drug-associated oral adverse effects-Dental, salivary and neurosensory reactions. Part 1(WILEY, 2019-08)Numerous adverse drug reactions (ADR) manifest in the oral cavity and orofacial region. Dentists and other health professionals commonly encounter and manage these adverse effects however, due to lack of awareness and training, they are not always recognised as being drug-induced nor reported to pharmacovigilance agencies. The broad diversity and increasing number of medications for which dental pharmacovigilance is needed can be overwhelming for all health professionals. Thus, the aim of this review and guide was to outline the common medications associated with orofacial side effects so as to improve recognition, management and reporting of ADR. Adverse effects discussed in Part 1 include drug-induced bruxism, tardive dyskinesia, hairy tongue, gingival enlargement, hypersalivation, xerostomia, tooth discolouration and taste disturbance.
-
ItemA review and guide to drug-associated oral adverse effects-Oral mucosal and lichenoid reactions. Part 2(WILEY, 2019-08)Dental practitioners and other health professionals commonly encounter and manage adverse medicine effects that manifest in the orofacial region. Numerous medicines are associated with a variety of oral adverse effects. However, due to lack of awareness and training, these side effects are not always associated with medicine use and are underreported to pharmacovigilance agencies by dentists and other health professionals. This article aims to inform health professionals about the various oral adverse effects that can occur and the most commonly implicated drugs to improve the management, recognition and reporting of adverse drug effects. This article follows on from Part 1; however, the focus here is on lichenoid reactions and oral mucosal disorders including oral aphthous-like ulceration, mucositis and bullous disorders such as drug-induced pemphigus, pemphigoid, Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis.
-
ItemAntibiotic resistance and relevance to general dental practice in Australia(WILEY, 2018-12)Antibiotic resistance is a well-established global public health crisis, with the use and misuse of antibiotics being the principal cause of bacterial resistance. Studies in both Australia and overseas have demonstrated that the dental prescribing of antibiotics is increasing and that dentists tend to prescribe antibiotics unnecessarily and for incorrect clinical indications. Dental practitioners in Australia also prefer to prescribe moderate to broad-spectrum antibacterial agents and make some inappropriate antibiotic prescribing choices. This review aims to inform dentists about the overall scope and development of bacterial resistance, approaches and challenges to reducing resistance and, ultimately, the role of dental prescribers in practising with optimal antibiotic stewardship.
-
ItemCurrent prescribing trends of antibiotics by dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016. Part 1.(WILEY, 2018-09)BACKGROUND: Literature has shown dentists tend to overprescribe antibiotics and do not always prescribe in accordance with recommended guidelines. Unnecessary prescribing is one major factor that contributes to the development of antibiotic resistance. The aim of the present study was to assess the antibacterial prescribing patterns of dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016. METHODS: Data on dental antibacterial prescriptions dispensed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) from 2013 to 2016 was accessed and prescribing trends analysed. The prescribing rates were standardized to the dose and population. RESULTS: There was a slight decrease in the dispensed use of most antibacterials from 2013 to 2016, but there was a significant increase in the dispensed use of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid of 11.2%. Amoxicillin was the most commonly dispensed antibiotic, accounting for approximately 65% of all antibacterials from 2013 to 2016, while phenoxymethylpenicillin accounted for only 1.4% of prescriptions in 2016. There were low but significant quantities of dispensed antibiotic prescriptions that do not fit with current guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that dentists in Australia are prescribing some antibiotics inappropriately and there is a preference for moderate- to broad-spectrum agents. The current PBS dental schedule is inconsistent with prescribing guidelines and may contribute to inappropriate prescribing.
-
ItemCurrent prescribing trends of dental non-antibacterial medicines in Australia from 2013 to 2016. Part 2.(WILEY, 2018-09)BACKGROUND: There is limited literature regarding dental prescribing preferences for medicines other than antibiotics. This study aimed to describe the prescribing trends of dispensed prescription medicines by dentists in Australia from 2013 and 2016 and assess adherence to current guidelines. METHODS: Data were accessed from the Department of Health of all dental prescriptions dispensed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) from 2013 to 2016 and prescribing patterns were analysed. The prescribing rates were standardized to the dose and population. RESULTS: There was an overall increase in the standardized use of opioid analgesics by almost 30% over the time frame, with the combination paracetamol 500 mg plus codeine 30 mg tablet accounting for the majority of dispensed opioid prescriptions (96.2% in 2016). Dispensed benzodiazepine prescriptions increased by 14.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in the consumption of opioids is concerning, suggesting that continuing education is required for dentists to better understand their limited role in managing dental pain and potential for abuse. The substantial increase in the dispensed use of benzodiazepines also requires further investigation and there were some drugs prescribed inappropriately and not in accordance with guidelines. Consideration could also be given to reviewing the drugs listed on the PBS for dental prescribing.
-
ItemMedication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: Analysing the range of implicated drugs from the Australian database of adverse event notifications(WILEY, 2021-07)AIMS: Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is an uncommon but potentially debilitating condition, characterised by nonhealing jawbone, with or without mucosal exposure, in the presence of certain drugs. Those already strongly associated with MRONJ include antiresorptives denosumab and bisphosphonates; however, a growing range of other non-antiresorptive drugs is implicated. The aim of this study was to analyse all case reports of MRONJ submitted to the publicly available Database of Adverse Event Notification from the Therapeutic Goods Administration in Australia. METHODS: The Therapeutic Goods Administration was contacted on 6 January 2020 and asked for all reports containing the words "osteonecrosis of the jaw". This was provided in a spreadsheet of de-identified reports received from commencement of the database in 1971 until 1 October 2019. RESULTS: The drugs implicated in the 419 cases were divided by established drugs with MRONJ and secondary drugs that possibly contribute to MRONJ development. While the majority of cases were associated with denosumab or bisphosphonates (n = 405), there were 14 reports where secondary agents that directly or indirectly affect bone turnover, were also implicated. Some of these secondary drugs, including adalimumab, etanercept, methotrexate and rituximab have previously been associated with MRONJ in published case reports. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the sparse but growing literature associating an increasing number of drugs with MRONJ, and underscores the importance of considering all possible drugs that elevate a patient's MRONJ risk.