Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37680041›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2023

Medical profile of patients referred to an Australian postgraduate oral surgery clinic.

Anthony Chu Seng Ngu, Sitanshu Arora, Peter Reher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Anthony Chu Seng NguSchool of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Southport, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8561-1526
Sitanshu AroraSchool of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Southport, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7722-1464
Peter ReherSchool of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Southport, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4444-125X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThorough knowledge of a patient's medical history and medications is necessary for providing safe oral surgery care, and may be considered a form of risk management. This study investigated the prevalence of medical conditions and medication types in patients referred to an Australian postgraduate oral surgery clinic over 2 years. MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study of the clinical records of 233 randomized patients referred to the Griffith University (Queensland, Australia) postgraduate oral surgery clinic in 2018 and 2019 was performed. Medical conditions and medications were counted and categorized, and descriptive statistics were generated.

resultsIn all, 133 patients (57%) had at least one medical condition. 58% of them (77) had two or more categories of medical conditions, representing nearly a third (33.0%) of all sampled patients. The most prevalent category of medical conditions was psychiatric (25.3%), followed closely by cardiovascular (24.5%) diseases. Cardiovascular medications were the most prevalent, comprising 23.6% of all medications recorded, followed by psychotropics (18.3%).

conclusionOver half of patients referred to the postgraduate oral surgery clinic had at least one systemic medical condition. Nearly a third of patients referred had at least two distinct systemic medical conditions. With an ageing population and the accompanying rise in multimorbidity globally, dental school curricula must adapt to prepare students to meet these challenges in their careers.

Indexed as

Oral Surgical ProceduresAgingAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesHumansRetrospective Studiesclinical pharmacologydental educationmultimorbidityoral surgery

Identifiers

PMID37680041
PMCPMC10582212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.