ArticleFrontiers in oral health2026
Appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in dental practice: results of two clinical audits conducted at a university hospital.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major global public health threat, and dentistry contributes substantially to unnecessary antibiotic use. Despite the publication of clear prescribing recommendations by the European Society of Endodontology (ESE) in 2018, inappropriate antibiotic prescribing remains common, particularly in dental emergency settings. This study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in a university dental emergency department and to assess the impact of an audit-and-feedback intervention. A prospective two-phase clinical audit was conducted in 2025 at the University Hospital of Marseille. Two consecutive two-week audit periods were conducted before and after individualized feedback and educational workshops. Prescriptions were classified according to ESE guidelines as appropriate (A1, A2) or inappropriate (I1, I2). A secondary analysis evaluated the appropriateness of treatment modalities (A1C, A1NC). Statistical analyses were performed using Chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. A total of 640 patients were included. Antibiotics were prescribed in 30.3% of consultations. The proportion of appropriate prescriptions did not improve significantly between audits (A1 + A2: 71.9% vs. 77.6%,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.