10 research outputs found

    Genetic Susceptibility Contributing to Periodontal and Cardiovascular Disease

    Full text link
    Periodontal disease (PD) and coronary artery disease (CAD) are common diseases characterized by an overaggressive inflammatory response to diverse stimuli. Whereas PD leads to destruction of the tooth-supporting structures, CAD is a chronic inflammatory condition ultimately causing myocardial infarction via narrowing and occluding of blood vessels. Classical twin studies led to the conclusion that both complex diseases have a similar degree of heritability and that a significant fraction of the genetic factors accounting for this heritability is shared. Recent genome-wide association and large-scale candidate gene studies highlight that variations in &gt;50 genes are associated with premature CAD, while variations in only 4 genes showing nominally significant associations with aggressive periodontitis and/or chronic periodontitis have so far been identified. Remarkably, 3 of the PD loci (75%) show shared associations with CAD ( ANRIL/CDKN2B-AS1, PLG, CAMTA1/VAMP3), suggesting involvement of common pathogenic mechanisms. In this critical review, we highlight recent progress in identifying genetic markers and variants associated with PD, present their overlap with CAD, and discuss functional aspects. In addition, we answer why a significant fraction of the heritability of PD is still missing, and we suggest approaches that may be taken to close the gap. </jats:p

    Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM)—Project summary and recommendations

    No full text
    © 2021 John Wiley & Sons LtdOral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact—the dimensions of oral health-related quality of life—capture dental patients’ oral health problems worldwide and regardless of whether the patient currently suffers from oral diseases or intends to prevent them in the future. Using scores for these dimensions, the project Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM) aims to provide four-dimensional oral health impact information across oral diseases and settings. In this article, project authors summarize MOM’s findings and provide recommendations about how to improve standardized oral health impact assessment. Project MOM’s systematic reviews identified four-dimensional impact information for 189 adult and 22 pediatric patient populations that were contained in 170 publications. A typical functional, pain-related, aesthetical, and psychosocial impact (on a 0-8 impact metric based on two items with a response format 0 = never, 1 = hardly ever, 2 = occasionally, 3 = fairly often, 4 = very often) was about 2 to 3 units. Project MOM provides five recommendations to improve standardized oral health impact assessment for all oral diseases in all settings

    RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USE AND SCORING OF ORAL HEALTH IMPACT PROFILE VERSIONS

    No full text
    © 2021 Elsevier Inc.Background: OHIP's original seven-domain structure does not fit empirical data, but a psychometrically sound and clinically more plausible structure with the four OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact has emerged. Consequently, use and scoring of available OHIP versions need to be revisited. Aim: We assessed how well the overall construct OHRQoL and its four dimensions were measured with several OHIP versions (20, 19, 14, and 5 items) to derive recommendations which instruments should be used and how to score them. Methods: Data came from the “Dimensions of OHRQoL Project” and used the project's learning sample (5,173 prosthodontic patients and general population subjects with 49-item OHIP data). We computed correlations among OHIP versions’ summary scores. Correlations between OHRQoL dimensions, on one hand, and OHIP versions’ domain scores or OHIP-5′s items, on the other hand, were also computed. OHIP use and scoring recommendations were derived for psychometrically solid but also practical OHRQoL assessment. Results: Summary scores of 5-, 14-, 19- and 49-item versions correlated highly (r = 0.91–0.98), suggesting similar OHRQoL construct measurement across versions. The OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact were best measured by the OHIP domain scores for Physical Disability, Physical Pain, Psychological Discomfort, and Handicap, respectively. Conclusion: Recommendations were derived which OHIP should be preferably used and how OHIP versions should be scored to capture the overall construct and the dimensions of OHRQoL. Psychometrically solid and practical OHRQoL assessment in all settings across all oral health conditions can be achieved with the 5-item OHIP

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

    No full text
    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. Dentists (N 5 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. 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 dentis tprovided explanations suggested evidence against the OHRQoL dimensions as the concepts that capture dental patients’ suffering. 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 patient
    corecore