Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), the most widely used drugs for the treatment of depression, have been reported to reduce bone formation and increase the risk of bone fracture. Since osseointegration is influenced by bone metabolism, this study aimed to investigate the association between SSRIs and the risk of failures in osseointegrated implants. This retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients treated with dental implants from January 2007 to January 2013. A total of 916 dental implants in 490 patients (94 implants on 51 patients using SSRIs) were used to estimate the risk of failure associated with the use of SSRIs. Data analysis involved Cox proportional hazards, generalized estimating equation models, multilevel mixed effects parametric survival analysis, and Kaplan-Meier analysis. After 3 to 67 mo of follow-up, 38 dental implants failed and 784 succeeded in the nonusers group, while 10 failed and 84 succeeded in the SSRI-users group. The main limitation of this retrospective study was that drug compliance dose and treatment period could not be acquired from the files of the patients. The primary outcome was that compared with nonusers of SSRIs, SSRI usage was associated with an increased risk of dental implants failure (hazard ratio, 6.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-31.61; p = .03). The failure rates were 4.6% for SSRI nonusers and 10.6% for SSRI users. The secondary outcomes were that small implant diameters (≤4 mm; p = .02) and smoking habits (p = .01) also seemed to be associated with higher risk of implant failure. Our findings indicate that treatment with SSRIs is associated with an increased failure risk of osseointegrated implants, which might suggest a careful surgical treatment planning for SSRI users.

No abstract

Our findings suggest that treatment with antihypertensive drugs may be associated with an increased survival rate of osseointegrated implants. To our knowledge, this could be the first study showing that the systemic use of a medication could be associated with higher survival rate of dental implants.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have a negative impact on bone accrual. Because osseointegration is influenced by bone metabolism, this study investigates the association between PPIs and the risk of osseointegrated implant failure. This retrospective cohort study included a total of 1,773 osseointegrated dental implants in 799 patients (133 implants in 58 PPIs users and 1,640 in 741 non-users) who were treated at the East Coast Oral Surgery Clinic in Moncton, Canada, from January 2007 to September 2015. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to describe the hazard function of dental implant failure by PPIs usage. Multilevel mixed effects parametric survival analyses were used to test the association between PPIs exposure and risk of implant failure adjusting for potential confounders. The failure rates were 6.8% for people using PPIs compared to 3.2% for non-users. Subjects using PPIs had a higher risk of dental implant failure (HR = 2.73; 95% CI = 1.10-6.78) compared to those who did not use the drugs. The findings suggest that treatment with PPIs may be associated with an increased risk of osseointegrated dental implant failure.

No abstract

Poor reporting in randomized clinical trial (RCT) abstracts reduces quality and misinforms readers. Spin, a biased presentation of findings, could frequently mislead clinicians to accept a clinical intervention despite non-significant primary outcome. Therefore, good reporting practices and absence of spin enhances research quality. We aim to assess the reporting quality and spin in abstracts of RCTs evaluating the effect of periodontal therapy on cardiovascular (CVD) outcomes. Methods PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and 17 trial registration platforms were searched. Cohort, non-randomized, non-English studies, and pediatric studies were excluded. RCT abstracts were reviewed by 2 authors using the CONSORT for abstracts and spin checklists for data extraction. Cohen's Kappa statistic was used to assess inter-rater agreement. Data on the selected RCT publication metrics were collected. Descriptive analysis was performed with non-parametric methods. Correlation analysis between quality, spin and bibliometric parameters was conducted. Results 24 RCTs were selected for CONSORT analysis and 14 fulfilled the criteria for spin analysis. Several important RCT elements per CONSORT were neglected in the abstract including description of the study population (100%), explicitly stated primary outcome (87%), methods of randomization and blinding (100%), trial registration (87%). No RCT examined true outcomes (CVD events). A significant fraction of the abstracts appeared with at least one form of spin in the results and conclusions (86%) and claimed some treatment benefit in

Aim This meta‐research study aimed to investigate the level of compliance with the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) Guidelines for the inclusion, analysis, and reporting of sex/gender, in periodontitis‐related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Materials and Methods Following the inclusion of RCTs related to the treatment of periodontitis published between 2018 and 2019, we applied the SAGER checklist to assess the adherence to sex/gender reporting guidelines. We used non‐parametric descriptive statistics and correlation models to test the association of the dependent outcome with other variables. Results One hundred and one articles were included in the analysis. The female enrolment ranged between 30% and 94%. Twenty‐six studies enrolled less than 50% of female participants. The overall SAGER score (OSS) of item fulfilment ranged between 0 and 7 items with an average of 1.9 items signifying poor guideline adherence to the SAGER guidelines. These findings were not associated with the corresponding author gender (p = .623), publication year (p = .947), and funding source (p = .133). However, a significant but negative correlation with journal impact factor (r = −0.253, p = .026) was observed. Conclusions Sex and gender were frequently disregarded in clinical trial reporting. This oversight might limit the understanding of sex/gender differences in periodontitis‐related clinical trials.

Objectives Technology‐enhanced learning (TEL) provides a pliable and current way to present orthodontic curriculum material to students. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of TEL compared with traditional learning methods in the field of orthodontics. Materials and Methods The search comprised randomised controlled trials (RCTs) related to orthodontics' interactive learning from the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, Psyclnfo, ERIC, Web of Science, Dissertations and Theses Global. Two authors performed the screening, data extraction and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool (Rob 2) blindly and in duplicate. Kirkpatrick's 4‐level evaluation model was used to evaluate educational outcomes. Results A total of 3131 records were identified of which 11 RCT were included. On level 1 (Reaction), students had a positive attitude towards TEL. On level 2 (Learning), included studies did not report any significant knowledge improvement when TEL was compared with traditional learning strategies. One study assessed level 3 (Behaviour), where students felt that flipped classroom learning created feelings of greater confidence. On level 4 (Results), most studies suggested that TEL tools are as equally effective in imparting information as traditional tools and recommended that both methods should be considered in teaching students. Conclusion Technology‐enhanced learning techniques might have the potential to enhance educational outcomes in orthodontic education and students seem to enjoy the implementation of technology in the learning process. These educational tools should be used as an adjunct to the traditional didactic classroom, and not as a replacement, due to the challenges encountered with their application.