Dataset Information

Why Patients Visit Dentists - A Study in all World Health Organization Regions.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The dimensions of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact are the major areas where patients are impacted by oral diseases and dental interventions. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether dental patients' reasons to visit the dentist fit the 4 OHRQoL dimensions.

Methods

Dentists (N = 1580) from 32 countries participated in a web-based survey. For their patients with current oral health problems, dentists were asked whether these problems were related to teeth, mouth, and jaws' function, pain, appearance, or psychosocial impact or whether they do not fit the aforementioned 4 categories. Dentists were also asked about their patients who intended to prevent future oral health problems. For both patient groups, the proportions of oral health problems falling into the 4 OHRQoL dimensions were calculated.

Results

For every 100 dental patients with current oral health problems, 96 had problems related to teeth, mouth, and jaws' function, pain, appearance, or psychosocial impact. For every 100 dental patients who wanted to prevent future oral health problems, 92 wanted to prevent problems related to these 4 OHRQoL dimensions. Both numbers increased to at least 98 of 100 patients when experts analyzed dentists' explanations of why some oral health problems would not fit the four dimension. For the remaining 2 of 100 patients, none of the dentist-provided explanations suggested evidence against the OHRQoL dimensions as the concepts that capture dental patients' suffering.

Conclusion

Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact capture dental patients' oral health problems worldwide. These 4 OHRQoL dimensions offer a psychometrically sound and practical framework for patient care and research, identifying what is important to dental patients.

SUBMITTER: John MT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7490464 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo help adapt cardiovascular disease risk prediction approaches to low-income and middle-income countries, WHO has convened an effort to develop, evaluate, and illustrate revised risk models. Here, we report the derivation, validation, and illustration of the revised WHO cardiovascular disease risk prediction charts that have been adapted to the circumstances of 21 global regions.MethodsIn this model revision initiative, we derived 10-year risk prediction models for fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease (ie, myocardial infarction and stroke) using individual participant data from the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration. Models included information on age, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, and total cholesterol. For derivation, we included participants aged 40-80 years without a known baseline history of cardiovascular disease, who were followed up until the first myocardial infarction, fatal coronary heart disease, or stroke event. We recalibrated models using age-specific and sex-specific incidences and risk factor values available from 21 global regions. For external validation, we analysed individual participant data from studies distinct from those used in model derivation. We illustrated models by analysing data on a further 123 743 individuals from surveys in 79 countries collected with the WHO STEPwise Approach to Surveillance.FindingsOur risk model derivation involved 376 177 individuals from 85 cohorts, and 19 333 incident cardiovascular events recorded during 10 years of follow-up. The derived risk prediction models discriminated well in external validation cohorts (19 cohorts, 1 096 061 individuals, 25 950 cardiovascular disease events), with Harrell's C indices ranging from 0·685 (95% CI 0·629-0·741) to 0·833 (0·783-0·882). For a given risk factor profile, we found substantial variation across global regions in the estimated 10-year predicted risk. For example, estimated cardiovascular disease risk for a 60-year-old male smoker without diabetes and with systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg and total cholesterol of 5 mmol/L ranged from 11% in Andean Latin America to 30% in central Asia. When applied to data from 79 countries (mostly low-income and middle-income countries), the proportion of individuals aged 40-64 years estimated to be at greater than 20% risk ranged from less than 1% in Uganda to more than 16% in Egypt.InterpretationWe have derived, calibrated, and validated new WHO risk prediction models to estimate cardiovascular disease risk in 21 Global Burden of Disease regions. The widespread use of these models could enhance the accuracy, practicability, and sustainability of efforts to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease worldwide.FundingWorld Health Organization, British Heart Foundation (BHF), BHF Cambridge Centre for Research Excellence, UK Medical Research Council, and National Institute for Health Research.

Project description:BackgroundResearch in 2007 showed that World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations were largely based on expert opinion, rarely used systematic evidence-based methods, and did not follow the organization's own "Guidelines for Guidelines". In response, the WHO established a "Guidelines Review Committee" (GRC) to implement and oversee internationally recognized standards. We examined the impact of these changes on WHO guideline documents and explored senior staff's perceptions of the new procedures.Methods and findingsWe used the AGREE II guideline appraisal tool to appraise ten GRC-approved guidelines from nine WHO departments, and ten pre-GRC guidelines matched by department and topic. We interviewed 20 senior staff across 16 departments and analyzed the transcripts using the framework approach. Average AGREE II scores for GRC-approved guidelines were higher across all six AGREE domains compared with pre-GRC guidelines. The biggest changes were noted for "Rigour of Development" (up 37.6%, from 30.7% to 68.3%) and "Editorial Independence" (up 52.7%, from 20.9% to 73.6%). Four main themes emerged from the interviews: (1) high standards were widely recognized as essential for WHO credibility, particularly with regard to conflicts of interest; (2) views were mixed on whether WHO needed a single quality assurance mechanism, with some departments purposefully bypassing the procedures; (3) staff expressed some uncertainties in applying the GRADE approach, with departmental staff concentrating on technicalities while the GRC remained concerned the underlying principles were not fully institutionalized; (4) the capacity to implement the new standards varied widely, with many departments looking to an overstretched GRC for technical support.ConclusionsSince 2007, WHO guideline development methods have become more systematic and transparent. However, some departments are bypassing the procedures, and as yet neither the GRC, nor the quality assurance standards they have set, are fully embedded within the organization.

Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) designated clarithromycin-resistant Helicobacter pylori a high priority for antibiotic research and development. However, there are no clear data on the global distribution of resistance or its clinical effects. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the distribution of H pylori resistance to commonly used antibiotics and to measure the association between antibiotic resistance and treatment failure. METHODS:We searched publication databases for studies that assessed rates of H pylori resistance to clarithromycin, metronidazole, levofloxacin, amoxicillin, or tetracycline. Pooled estimates of primary and secondary resistance and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were grouped by WHO region. The association between antibiotic resistance and treatment failure was measured by extracting data on treatment efficacy in patients with resistant and susceptible isolates and pooling odds ratios with 95% CIs. RESULTS:We identified 178 studies, comprising 66,142 isolates from 65 countries. Primary and secondary resistance rates to clarithromycin, metronidazole, and levofloxacin were ?15% in all WHO regions, except primary clarithromycin resistance in the Americas (10%; 95% CI, 4%-16%) and South-East Asia region (10%; 95% CI, 5%-16%) and primary levofloxacin resistance in the European region (11%; 95% CI, 9%-13%). There was considerable heterogeneity (I2 > 75%) among all analyses-this might have resulted from the grouping of resistance rates by country. Increasing antibiotic resistance was observed in most WHO regions. Resistance to clarithromycin was significantly associated with failure of clarithromycin-containing regimens (odds ratio, 6.97; 95% CI, 5.23-9.28; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:Resistance of H pylori to antibiotics has reached alarming levels worldwide, which has a great effect on efficacy of treatment. Local surveillance networks are required to select appropriate eradication regimens for each region.

Project description:BackgroundTo examine cross-national patterns and correlates of lifetime and 12-month comorbid DSM-IV anxiety disorders among people with lifetime and 12-month DSM-IV major depressive disorder (MDD).MethodNationally or regionally representative epidemiological interviews were administered to 74 045 adults in 27 surveys across 24 countries in the WHO World Mental Health (WMH) Surveys. DSM-IV MDD, a wide range of comorbid DSM-IV anxiety disorders, and a number of correlates were assessed with the WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI).Results45.7% of respondents with lifetime MDD (32.0-46.5% inter-quartile range (IQR) across surveys) had one of more lifetime anxiety disorders. A slightly higher proportion of respondents with 12-month MDD had lifetime anxiety disorders (51.7%, 37.8-54.0% IQR) and only slightly lower proportions of respondents with 12-month MDD had 12-month anxiety disorders (41.6%, 29.9-47.2% IQR). Two-thirds (68%) of respondents with lifetime comorbid anxiety disorders and MDD reported an earlier age-of-onset (AOO) of their first anxiety disorder than their MDD, while 13.5% reported an earlier AOO of MDD and the remaining 18.5% reported the same AOO of both disorders. Women and previously married people had consistently elevated rates of lifetime and 12-month MDD as well as comorbid anxiety disorders. Consistently higher proportions of respondents with 12-month anxious than non-anxious MDD reported severe role impairment (64.4 v. 46.0%; χ 2 1 = 187.0, p < 0.001) and suicide ideation (19.5 v. 8.9%; χ 2 1 = 71.6, p < 0.001). Significantly more respondents with 12-month anxious than non-anxious MDD received treatment for their depression in the 12 months before interview, but this difference was more pronounced in high-income countries (68.8 v. 45.4%; χ 2 1 = 108.8, p < 0.001) than low/middle-income countries (30.3 v. 20.6%; χ 2 1 = 11.7, p < 0.001).ConclusionsPatterns and correlates of comorbid DSM-IV anxiety disorders among people with DSM-IV MDD are similar across WMH countries. The narrow IQR of the proportion of respondents with temporally prior AOO of anxiety disorders than comorbid MDD (69.6-74.7%) is especially noteworthy. However, the fact that these proportions are not higher among respondents with 12-month than lifetime comorbidity means that temporal priority between lifetime anxiety disorders and MDD is not related to MDD persistence among people with anxious MDD. This, in turn, raises complex questions about the relative importance of temporally primary anxiety disorders as risk markers v. causal risk factors for subsequent MDD onset and persistence, including the possibility that anxiety disorders might primarily be risk markers for MDD onset and causal risk factors for MDD persistence.