Background The present study aimed to investigate the patients’ perception of the dental practice during the COVID-19 outbreak, and whether the pandemic will affect the attendance of orthodontic patients at the dental practice. An online questionnaire, including the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4), was submitted to Italian dental patients with items about their perceived risks when going to the dentist, concerns about continuing orthodontic treatment, and the onset of temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Data were analyzed with a chi-square test and logistic regression analysis. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. Results A total of 1566 subjects completed the survey, including 486 who were under orthodontic treatment or who had a child in orthodontic treatment. A total of 866 participants (55.3%) thought the risk of contracting the COVID-19 infection was higher in a dental practice; this perception was associated with gender (women more than man), age (over 60 years old) and high levels of distress (P<0.001). However, 894 patients (57.1%) felt comfortable going back to the dentist. Most of the orthodontic patients (84%) would continue their treatment. After the lockdown, there was a slight increase in the frequency of TMD pain (356 versus 334). Conclusions Most of the participants believed that the dental practice is a place at greater risk of contracting COVID-19, even if they continue to go to the dentist. Gender, age, and the level of distress were associated with the increase in the fear of going to the dentist due to COVID-19. Because of the pandemic, 16% of patients undergoing orthodontic treatment would not return to the dental practice to continue their orthodontic treatment after the lockdown. The prevalence of TMD pain in the population increased due to the pandemic.

Objectives The aim of this narrative review was to collect all findings from literature about oral signs and symptoms of COVID‐19, in order to draw a picture of oral involvement of this challenging viral infection, to help oral professionals in a better triage and early diagnosis. Material and methods The search for international literature was made including articles written in English and reporting about oral manifestations in patients with a diagnosis of COVID‐19. The publication time was limited to 2019 and 2020, up to May 20, 2020. A narrative review was performed. Results Twenty‐three articles were included in this review. Three different oral manifestations were found: taste alteration, oral blister and ulcers, and oral lesions associated with Kawasaki‐like diseases (erythema, bleeding of lips, “strawberry tongue”). The higher expression of Angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 in the oral cavity and in endothelial cells might be responsible for oral manifestation and the major report of signs and symptoms in the occidental countries. Conclusions Detecting oral signs and symptoms of COVID‐19 could be useful to perform a better preliminary triage in dental setting, and in recognizing possible early manifestations of the disease. However, considering the outbreak of COVID‐19 and the consequent difficulty of undergoing oral examinations, the oral manifestations might be misdiagnosed; then, we would encourage oral professionals to perform other studies about this topic.

Different drugs used to treat asthma, such as beta 2 agonists and inhaled steroids, may promote a higher risk of caries, dental erosion, periodontal disease and oral candidiasis. This article reviews the evidences of mechanisms involved in oral diseases in patients affected by asthma. The main mechanism involved is the reduction of salivary flow. Other mechanisms include: acid pH in oral cavity induced by inhaled drugs (particularly dry powder inhaled), lifestyle (bad oral hygiene and higher consumption of sweet and acidic drinks), gastroesophageal reflux, and the impairment of local immunity. In conclusion asthma is involved in the genesis of oral pathologies both directly and indirectly due to the effect of the drugs used to treat them. Other cofactors such as poor oral hygiene increase the risk of developing oral diseases in these patients. Preventive oral measures, therefore, should be part of a global care for patients suffering from asthma.

No abstract

ObjectiveLocal anaesthetics are very commonly used drugs in dentistry, and people who undergo procedures with local anaesthetics often refer adverse reactions that are not of allergic origin. Considering that in dentistry contact with allergens is very frequent, it is essential to assess the real incidence of allergy to local anaesthetics.Subjects and MethodsWe evaluated a group of 159 patients in whom adverse reaction occurred after procedures with local anaesthetics.ResultsThe reactions between allergy to local anaesthetic (immediate and delayed) and certain symptoms presented by patients were investigated. Allergy to latex and chlorexidine were investigated in all patients. Only one patient, who previously presented a constant erythema at the wrist after procedure with local anaesthetics, was positive to Mepivacaine patch test. Two patients were positive to latex and one to chlorexidine.ConclusionsThe main finding of this study was that a reaction registered in the medical history and reported by a patient is rarely allergic but the use of vasoconstrictors or emotional factors may account for it. However, a complete allergological investigation is necessary for a correct diagnosis and future management.