ArticleBritish dental journal2019
Infective endocarditis and the heavily restored dentition: are clinicians becoming more complacent regarding prevention?
Article in British dental journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dentists' practice and compliance with current guidelines of infective endocarditis prophylaxis- National survey study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2021Article
- IE advice.British dental journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byIE advice.2019
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce the risk of infective endocarditis (IE) in susceptible individuals is a topic which has historically prompted many controversial debates. In the past, dentists have been understandably unwilling to prescribe antibiotic prophylaxis for fear of deviating from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. However, in 2016, NICE altered the wording of these guidelines. The subtle change in wording implied that the clinician could use their clinical judgement, alongside advice from cardiologists, to deem their patient high-risk enough to prescribe antibiotics. In this article we discuss the implications of the NICE guidelines, and present the case of a patient who historically received antibiotic prophylaxis due to a history of rheumatic fever. Following the old NICE guidelines of 2008 he no longer received this prescription. As a consequence, he went on to suffer from IE from an unexpected cause due to ineffective preventative advice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31127223What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.