Our family-oriented program improved patients' self-efficacy and self-management, which in turn could decrease HbA1c levels.

BackgroundThere is mounting evidence to support the lack of awareness among pregnant women about health consequences and long term risks associated with poor oral hygiene during pregnancy. A recognised and important point of influence is their interaction with health professionals, particularly when receiving Antenatal Care. However, there is limited evidence about the perceptions of ANC providers in Australia toward the provision of perinatal oral healthcare. This study was undertaken to explore the knowledge, attitudes and practices of Antenatal Care (ANC) providers in New South Wales (NSW), Australia providing perinatal oral healthcare and to identify barriers to and predictors of their practices in this area.MethodsA cross sectional survey was undertaken of ANC providers (general practitioners, obstetricians/gynaecologists and midwives) practising in NSW, Australia. Participants were recruited through their professional organisations via email, postal mail, and networking at conferences. The survey addressed the domains of knowledge, attitude, barriers and practices towards oral healthcare, along with demographics. Data was entered into SPSS software and analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics.ResultsA total of 393 surveys (17.6% response rate) were completed comprising 124 general practitioners, 74 obstetricians/gynaecologists and 195 midwives. The results showed limited knowledge among ANC providers regarding the impact of poor maternal oral health on pregnancy/infant outcomes. Most (99%) participants agreed that maternal oral health was important yet few were discussing the importance of oral health or advising women to visit a dentist (16.4–21.5%). Further, less than a third felt they had the skills to provide oral health advice during pregnancy. ANC providers who were more knowledgeable about maternal oral health, had training and information in this area and greater experience, were more likely to engage in practices addressing the oral health of pregnant women.ConclusionThe findings suggest that ANC providers in NSW are not focussing on oral health with pregnant women. ANC providers seem willing to discuss oral health if they have appropriate education/training and information in this area. Further research at a national level is required to confirm whether these findings are similar in all Australian states.

Engaging all staff, encouraging ownership and stability of management are key factors in the successful implementation and maintenance of IR. IR is flexible and robust enough to accommodate different patient types and acuity.

BackgroundMidwives can play a key role in promoting the oral health of pregnant women and assessing their oral health status. A maternal oral assessment tool (MOS) was developed and pilot tested by the study investigators to assist midwives in this role and the results were promising. The aim of this study was to undertake further sensitivity and specificity assessment of the MOS tool using two-comparison approaches- the longer oral health screening tool known as the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and an oral assessment by trained study dentists.MethodsPregnant women were recruited for this study as part of a larger randomised controlled trial of a Midwifery Initiated Oral Health (MIOH) program. Pregnant women completed the MOS and OHIP-14 as part of their initial assessment undertaken by 38 trained and accredited midwives. A dental assessment was conducted for all women in the intervention group using three trained study dentists with high inter rater reliability.ResultsTwo hundred and eleven pregnant women participated in the validation of the MOS tool. Results from both approaches found the MOS tool to have high sensitivity, correctly identifying 88–94 % of women at risk of poor dental health, and low specificity (14–21 %).ConclusionsThis study has shown that the MOS tool can be successfully implemented by midwives during a woman’s first antenatal visit and can identify up to 94 % of women at risk of poor oral health and needing a dental referral. The tool has the potential to be transferable to other antenatal care providers and could be incorporated into hospital obstetric database systems.Trial registration number ACTRN12612001271897, 6th Dec 2012, retrospectively registered.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12884-016-1140-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Early childhood caries is a common chronic childhood disease and maternal oral health is a risk factor. Improving the oral health behaviours of pregnant women/young mothers can positively influence the oral health of children and reduce their caries risk. Such preventative strategies have been undertaken by non-dental professionals producing mixed results encompassing various interventions across the perinatal period. However, no comprehensive review of these studies has been undertaken. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of maternal oral health programs undertaken during the antenatal and/or postnatal period by non-dental health professionals to reduce early childhood caries. Methods A systematic search of five databases was undertaken using key search terms. Studies were included if they (a) involved quantitative study designs with a control; (b) were published in English; (c) reported on interventions delivered by non-dental professionals (d) delivered the intervention to expectant mothers or mothers with young infants up to 24 months; (e) measured outcomes when the child was under 5 years; (f) measured changes in oral health outcomes of children clinically and oral health behaviours of mothers or children. No restrictions were placed on the study quality and setting. Results Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and involved interventions delivered by diverse non-dental professionals across the antenatal ( n = 1), postnatal ( n = 6) and perinatal period ( n = 2). Most studies were of low methodological quality ( n = 6). The interventions focussed on oral health education ( n = 8), dental referrals ( n = 3) and oral health assessments ( n = 1). Interventions conducted in either the postnatal or antenatal periods showed meaningful improvements in children’s clinical and mother’s behavioural oral health outcomes. The outcomes appear to be sustained when a suite of interventions were used along with referral reminders. There were mixed results from interventions across the perinatal period. Conclusions Non-dental professionals can promote maternal oral health by providing oral health education, risk assessment and referrals. Combining these interventions could provide a sustained improvement in oral health outcomes for children although current evidence is weak. More high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and determine whether the antenatal and/or postnatal period is best suited to deliver these interventions. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12903-019-0862-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Medication-related incidents must be captured in a way that facilitates meaningful categorisation including contributing factors, potential and actual/risk of harm and contextual information on the incident.

Background: Early childhood caries is a common chronic childhood disease and maternal oral health is a risk factor. Improving the oral health behaviours of pregnant women/young mothers can positively influence the oral health of children and reduce their caries risk. Such preventative strategies have been undertaken by non-dental professionals producing mixed results encompassing various interventions across the perinatal period. However, no comprehensive review of these studies has been undertaken. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of maternal oral health programs undertaken during the antenatal and/or postnatal period by non-dental health professionals to reduce early childhood caries. Methods: A systematic search of five databases was undertaken using key search terms. Studies were included if they (a) involved quantitative study designs with a control; (b) were published in English; (c) reported on interventions delivered by non-dental professionals (d) delivered the intervention to expectant mothers or mothers with young infants up to 24 months; (e) measured outcomes when the child was under 5 years; (f) measured changes in oral health outcomes of children clinically and oral health behaviours of mothers or children. No restrictions were placed on the study quality and setting. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and involved interventions delivered by diverse non-dental professionals across the antenatal (n=1), postnatal (n=6) and perinatal period (n=2). Most studies were of low methodological quality (n=6). The interventions focussed on oral health education (n=8), dental referrals (n=3) and oral health assessments (n=1). Interventions conducted in either the postnatal or antenatal periods showed meaningful improvements in children’s clinical and mother’s behavioural oral health outcomes. The outcomes appear to be sustained when a suite of interventions were used along with referral reminders. There were mixed results from interventions across the perinatal period. Conclusions: Non-dental professionals can promote maternal oral health by providing oral health education, risk assessment and referrals. Combining these interventions could provide a sustained improvement in oral health outcomes for children although current evidence is weak. More high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and determine whether the antenatal and/or postnatal period is best suited to deliver these interventions.

No abstract