Objectives To review the content of recommendations within antenatal oral healthcare guidance documents and appraise the quality of their methodology to inform areas of development, clinical practice, and research focus. Method A systematic search of five electronic databases, Google search engine, and databases from relevant professional and guideline development groups published in English, developed countries, and between 2010 and 2020 was undertaken to identify guidance documents related to antenatal oral healthcare. Quality of documents was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II tool, and a 3-step quality cut-off value was used. Inductive thematic analysis was employed to categories discreet recommendations into themes. Results Six guidelines and one consensus statement were analysed. Two documents developed within Australia scored ≥60% across five of the six domains of the quality appraisal tool and were recommended for use. Four documents (developed in the United States and Canada) were recommended for use with modifications, whilst one document (developed in Europe) was not recommended. A total of 98 discreet recommendations were identified and demonstrated considerable unanimity but differed in scope and level of information. The main content and number of recommendations were inductively categorised within the following clinical practice points: risk factor assessments (n = 2), screening and assessment (n = 10), pre-pregnancy care (referral, n = 1), antenatal care (health education and advice, n = 14; management of nausea and vomiting, n = 7; referral, n = 2), postnatal care (health education and advice, n = 1; anticipatory guidance, n = 6), documentation (n = 4), coordinated care (n = 4), capacity building (n = 6), and community engagement (n = 1). Conclusion The methodological rigour of included guidance documents revealed areas of strengths and limitations and posit areas for improvement. Further research could centre on adapting antenatal oral healthcare guidelines and consensus statements to local contexts. More high-quality studies examining interventions within antenatal oral healthcare are needed to support the development of recommendations.
ObjectiveTo explore women's oral health experiences and barriers to dental care and identify potential strategies to improve oral health during pregnancy.MethodsA qualitative descriptive study design was used. Purposively elected antepartum and postpartum women ≥18 years of age from Tasmania, Australia, were recruited using maximum variation sampling. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted, and all qualitative data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach.ResultsFifteen women were interviewed with a mean ± SD age of 32.3 ± 4.5 years. Three key themes were generated from the data that described women's perceived changes in their oral health during pregnancy; barriers to oral health care during and after pregnancy; and perceived strategies to improve access to care. Most women acknowledged the importance of maintaining good oral health but reported a decline in their oral health status during pregnancy. Women also identified several barriers to dental care, including treatment costs, competing maternal priorities, limited oral health knowledge and negative perceptions towards dentistry. The provision of preventative oral health care by ANC providers was also limited. Community awareness, patient education resources and assessment tools could support the promotion of oral health care. Women also perceived that interprofessional collaboration between antenatal and dental providers played a key role in promoting oral health.ConclusionThis study explored women's varied oral health experiences and perceptions during pregnancy and highlighted critical barriers and enablers to dental care. Policy‐level strategies that promote interprofessional collaboration between antenatal and dental providers and expand dental care access are suggested to overcome barriers to oral health for women during pregnancy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.