British dental journal
-
British dental journal · Apr 2014
ReviewIbuprofen and/or paracetamol (acetaminophen) for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth, a Cochrane systematic review.
This paper compares the beneficial and harmful effects of paracetamol, ibuprofen and the novel combination of both in a single tablet for pain relief following the surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth. In this systematic review only randomised controlled double-blinded clinical trials were included. We calculated the proportion of patients with at least 50% pain relief at 2 and 6 hours post dosing, along with the proportion of participants using rescue medication at 6 and 8 hours. ⋯ For the combined drug, the risk ratio for at least 50% maximum pain relief over 6 hours is 1.77 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.39) based on total pain relief (TOTPAR) data. There is high quality evidence that ibuprofen is superior to paracetamol. The novel combination drug shows encouraging results when compared to the single drugs (based on two trials).
-
British dental journal · Apr 2014
ReviewIbuprofen and/or paracetamol (acetaminophen) for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth, a Cochrane systematic review.
This paper compares the beneficial and harmful effects of paracetamol, ibuprofen and the novel combination of both in a single tablet for pain relief following the surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth. In this systematic review only randomised controlled double-blinded clinical trials were included. We calculated the proportion of patients with at least 50% pain relief at 2 and 6 hours post dosing, along with the proportion of participants using rescue medication at 6 and 8 hours. ⋯ For the combined drug, the risk ratio for at least 50% maximum pain relief over 6 hours is 1.77 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.39) based on total pain relief (TOTPAR) data. There is high quality evidence that ibuprofen is superior to paracetamol. The novel combination drug shows encouraging results when compared to the single drugs (based on two trials).
-
British dental journal · Mar 2013
ReviewWhy do GDPs fail to recognise oral cancer? The argument for an oral cancer checklist.
Delays in the diagnosis of oral cancer have been the subject of several cases recently reported in the media. Different types of delays include patient delays, doctor delays and system delays. Although diagnostic delays in primary care constitute a minority of these cases they are potentially modifiable and therefore an important aspect of care to address. ⋯ However several problems in fully assessing patients for oral cancer have been reported. These include time constraints, a lack of remuneration and little training in assessing risk factors and conducting a soft tissue examination. This article reviews these issues and puts forward the case for oral cancer detection as a compulsory CPD topic and a national oral cancer checklist as a tool to ensure all aspects of the oral cancer assessment are considered, which can then be audited and remunerated.
-
Immunological reactions to chlorhexidine, including allergy (Type I hypersensitivity) and allergic contact dermatitis/stomatitis (Type IV hypersensitivity), have been recognised for many years. This potential safety issue, however, is not well known within dentistry. The purpose of this paper is to alert dentists and dental care professionals to the potential of chlorhexidine in causing hypersensitivity reactions and to consider this possibility if unexplained hypersensitivity reactions occur.
-
British dental journal · Jul 2012
ReviewInduction training for senior house officers in oral and maxillofacial surgery: literature review and local evaluation.
Induction for junior doctors is an important part of training where they can gain knowledge, confidence and integration into the hospital team. Dentally trained oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) senior house officers (SHOs) enter into this unfamiliar environment often with limited experience. The OMFS SHO induction process is an expected and essential part of hospital training. ⋯ The current literature and local departmental evaluation suggests changes are required. There appear to be discrepancies in the perceived role of induction and the inductions provided. The literature review and study examines the attitudes towards induction training and recommendations for improvement.