Article

Assessing the association between receipt of dental care, diabetes control measures and health care utilization.

Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR 97227-1110, USA.
Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) (Impact Factor: 1.82). 01/2012; 143(1):20-30. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2012.0014
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The literature contains few studies regarding the relationships between receipt of regular dental care and medical outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes.
The authors compared hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) levels (< 7 percent versus < 7 percent), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (< 100 milligrams/deciliter versus ≥ 100 mg/dL) and diabetes-specific hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) visits (one or more visits versus no visits) in 493 people with type 2 diabetes who received regular dental care (≥ two prophylactic visits, periodontal treatment visits or both during a 12-month period) with measures in 493 people with type 2 diabetes who did not receive any dental care. The authors matched patients, all of whom had private medical and dental insurance benefits during the study period, with regard to age, sex and previous utilization of ED visits and hospital admissions, and they followed them for three years.
The authors analyzed the data by using multiple logistic regression, which showed that receipt of regular dental care was associated with lower diabetes-specific ED utilization (odds ratio [OR] = 0.61, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] = 0.40-0.92) and hospital admissions (OR = 0.61, 95 percent CI, 0.39-0.95) after they adjusted for age, sex, previous hospital admissions, previous ED utilization, race, baseline HbA(1c) values, Charlson comorbidity index score, body mass index status, periodontal risk status and primary care utilization. The authors found no significant association between receipt of dental care and control of HbA(1c) levels.
The study results show an association between regular receipt of dental care and reduced diabetes-specific medical care utilization (that is, ED visits and hospital admissions).
Although the results of this study could not show causality, they suggest that receipt of dental care may reduce diabetes-specific health care utilization. Prospective studies are needed to better understand the relationship of receipt of dental care with diabetes control and health care utilization measures.

1 Bookmark
 · 
125 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities regarding untreated oral disease exist for older adults, and poor oral health diminishes quality of life. The ElderSmile program integrated screening for diabetes and hypertension into its community-based oral health activities at senior centers in northern Manhattan. The program found a willingness among minority seniors (aged ≥ 50 years) to be screened for primary care sensitive conditions by dental professionals and a high level of unrecognized disease (7.8% and 24.6% of ElderSmile participants had positive screening results for previously undiagnosed diabetes and hypertension, respectively). Dental professionals may screen for primary care-sensitive conditions and refer patients to health care providers for definitive diagnosis and treatment. The ElderSmile program is a replicable model for community-based oral and general health screening. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print April 18, 2013: e1-e4. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301259).
    American Journal of Public Health 04/2013; · 3.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: The reuse of electronic patient data collected during clinical care has received increased attention as a way to increase our evidence base. The purpose of this paper was to review studies reusing electronic patient data for dental research. DATA SOURCES: 1,527 citations obtained by searching MEDLINE and Embase databases, hand-searching six dental and informatics journals, and snowball sampling. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies reusing electronic patient data for research on dental and craniofacial topics, alone or in combination with medical conditions, medications and outcomes. Studies using administrative or research databases and systematic reviews were excluded. Three reviewers extracted data independently and performed analysis jointly RESULTS: The 60 studies reviewed covered epidemiological (32 studies), outcomes (16), health services research (10) and other (2) topics; were primarily retrospective (58 studies); varied significantly in sample size (9 to 153,619 patients) and follow-up period (1 to 12 years); often drew on other data sources in addition to electronic ones (25); but rarely tapped electronic dental record (EDR) data in private practices (3). Type of research was not associated with data sources used, but research topics/questions were. The most commonly reported advantages of reusing electronic data were being able to study large samples and saving time, while data quality and the inability to capture study-specific data were identified as major limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Dental research reusing electronic patient data is nascent but accelerating. Future EDR design should focus on enhancing data quality, begin to integrate research data collection and implement interoperability with electronic medical records to facilitate oralsystemic investigations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Measuring and improving the quality of dental care requires that we begin to reuse electronic patient data collected in practice for clinical research. Practice data can potentially serve as a useful complement to data collected in traditional research studies.
    Journal of dentistry 04/2013; · 3.20 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Risk factors play an important role in an individual's response to periodontal infection. Identification of these risk factors helps to target patients for prevention and treatment, with modification of risk factors critical to the control of periodontal disease. Shifts in our understanding of periodontal disease prevalence, and advances in scientific methodology and statistical analysis in the last few decades, have allowed identification of several major systemic risk factors for periodontal disease. The first change in our thinking was the understanding that periodontal disease is not universal, but that severe forms are found only in a portion of the adult population who show abnormal susceptibility. Analysis of risk factors and the ability to statistically adjust and stratify populations to eliminate the effects of confounding factors have allowed identification of independent risk factors. These independent but modifiable, risk factors for periodontal disease include lifestyle factors, such as smoking and alcohol consumption. They also include diseases and unhealthy conditions such as diabetes mellitus, obesity, metabolic syndrome, osteoporosis, and low dietary calcium and vitamin D. These risk factors are modifiable and their management is a major component of the contemporary care of many periodontal patients. Genetic factors also play a role in periodontal disease and allow one to target individuals for prevention and early detection. The role of genetic factors in aggressive periodontitis is clear. However, although genetic factors (i.e., specific genes) are strongly suspected to have an association with chronic adult periodontitis, there is as yet no clear evidence for this in the general population. It is important to pursue efforts to identify genetic factors associated with chronic periodontitis because such factors have potential in identifying patients who have a high susceptibility for development of this disease. Many of the systemic risk factors for periodontal disease, such as smoking, diabetes and obesity, and osteoporosis in postmenopausal women, are relatively common and can be expected to affect most patients with periodontal disease seen in clinics and dental practices. Hence, risk factor identification and management has become a key component of care for periodontal patients.
    Periodontology 2000 06/2013; 62(1):59-94. · 4.01 Impact Factor