Dentists In Australia Research Articles

The current attitudes and practices of dentists in Australia towards composite repair: A cross-sectional survey study.

Whether to replace or repair a composite restoration is controversial and varies among clinicians. This study was designed to collect information on the attitudes and practices of Australian dentists towards composite repair. An electronic 16-item questionnaire was distributed online on Australian clinicians' dental forum with a URL address and instructions on completing the survey. The questionnaire remained accessible for 2 months. The data collected were analysed statistically using descriptive, average rank, Pearson chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests at α = 0.05. Repair of composite restorations was a widely accepted treatment modality among surveyed dentists. Despite this, approximately half of clinicians reported the prognosis of repaired restorations to be worse when compared to replacement. The most cited indications for repair were partial loss or fracture of the restoration, while the most common reason for repair was because this treatment modality was more conservative in terms of tooth structure removal. Most important patient factor influencing decision to repair composite restoration was caries risk of the patient (n = 50). Most significant situational factor to consider in decision whether to repair was previous (failed) attempts to repair (n = 74). The most important tooth level factor was the proximity of restoration to pulp (mean statistic rank 2.22). The most common composite surface treatment employed by participants bonding to old composite was acid etching (n = 87), and the main reason participants employed their chosen surface treatment was based on personal experience (n = 72). The repair of composite restorations was a commonly performed procedure that is well accepted but may still be viewed as an inferior treatment to replacement by many Australian dentists. Most dentists agreed on indications for repair restorations and surface conditioning techniques, but there was wide variation in opinions overall. Due to the lack of high-quality evidence regarding composite repair techniques, dentists tend to rely on personal experience to guide their clinical decisions.

A Cross-Sectional Survey of the Use of Clear Aligners by General Dentists in Australia.

The primary aim of the investigation was to survey clear aligner therapy (CAT) use among general dentists in Australia. A secondary aim was to evaluate the factors that influenced general dentists in Australia not to provide CAT. General dentists registered with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency were invited to participate in a structured cross-sectional electronic survey. The survey covered demographics, preferred CAT systems and practices, relevant treatment planning and retention protocols, patient-reported CAT issues, pertinent respondent opinions, and reasons for not providing CAT. Descriptive statistics were computed via GraphPad Prism v10 (GraphPad Software Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA). Most of the 264 (n = 172; 65.2%) respondents indicated that they provided CAT. The majority (n = 82; 58.6%) reported that they treated between 1 and 20 patients with CAT annually. Invisalign was the most used system (n = 83; 61.2%), with 55 (41.7%), indicating that they used more than one system. Most (n = 124; 98.4%) were comfortable using CAT for mild crowding, whereas 73.4% (n = 94) were not comfortable in treating severe crowding with CAT. The median (IQR) number of patients per respondent treated with extraction of a permanent incisor or premolar was 0 (0). Issues regarding tooth positions were reportedly always or mostly in need of change in the initial treatment plan by 68.7%. Problems regarding patient compliance with CAT wear protocols (n = 67; 45.6%) and the predictability of treatment outcomes (n = 31; 21.1%) were the most identified themes of the free-text comments. Over 80% of those who did not provide CAT indicated that they preferred to refer to an orthodontist for management. Almost two-thirds of the respondents provided CAT. Invisalign was the most used system. The majority use CAT combined with nonextraction treatment. Most of those who did not provide CAT preferred to refer to an orthodontist for patient management.

3D dental records in Australian dental practice – a hidden gold mine for forensic identification

ABSTRACT Human identification via dental comparison is only possible if sufficient antemortem dental records are available. These records are sourced from dental practices. New 3D digital technologies are increasingly being used by dentists in Australia for routine clinical procedures and offer significantly more data for individualizing people than traditional 2D records. However, it is uncertain whether clinicians are aware of the importance of these records for forensic purposes. The collection of antemortem records from clinical practices is critical to successful identification by forensic odontology. A survey across 71 dental practices in South Australia explored both the availability of 3D dental records and the level of awareness among practitioners regarding their significance in forensic investigations. While 3D dental records are frequently produced in dental settings, there is a notable lack of awareness among practitioners of their critical value in forensic contexts. Retention practices for all records were highly variable. Despite the production of 3D records, their potential remains underutilized due to gaps in knowledge of forensic applicability. The findings highlight a significant opportunity for enhancing forensic identification through better education and management of 3D dental records. Addressing this gap is essential for improving the efficiency of forensic odontology.

Current arrangements for training dentists in Australia on primary care dentistry

There is an expectation in Australia that dental students engage in primary care as they learn to recognise and respond to aspects of a person's general health and wellbeing. These skills, knowledge and behaviours are outlined by the Australian Dental Council, the accrediting body of dental training programs. Education in primary care dentistry can be seen integrated across the length and breadth of dental curricula yet is not commonly referred to as primary care. Interprofessional education provides opportunities for dental students to develop their professional identities as primary healthcare practitioners and be seen as such by other health professions. We propose that the primary care dentistry could be elevated by naming and noticing these activities in the curriculum.

Dentists' knowledge of dental trauma based on the International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines: An Australian survey.

Background/AimTraumatic dental injuries are the result of impact injuries to the teeth and/or soft and hard tissues within and around the vicinity of the oral cavity and pose a very serious public health dilemma. The aim of this study was to appraise the level of knowledge of dentists in Australia regarding the management of traumatic dental injuries based on the International Association of Dental Traumatology (IADT) guidelines.MethodologyA link to an electronic questionnaire investigating personal and professional information and twelve questions about dental trauma was distributed by email using the Qualtrics Survey Software to ensure anonymity of the respondents, to members of the Australian Dental Association. The respondents were grouped according to demographic characteristics and practice profiles. Data were evaluated by the Student’s T test or one‐way ANOVA with post hoc testing using Fisher's least significant difference, with the α level set at 5%.ResultsA total of 180 complete responses were obtained. The overall mean number of correct answers was 7.55 ± 1.91 from a maximum possible score of twelve. Gender, year of primary dental qualification, dentist identity (general dentist or specialist), area of main practice or region worked by the practitioner did not significantly affect the mean scores. However, increased knowledge of the IADT guidelines was significantly associated with the number of trauma cases treated and the dentists' self‐reported knowledge.ConclusionsThe overall knowledge of Australian dentists regarding the management of traumatic dental injuries based on the IADT guidelines was generally good but it was also deficient in some areas.

Patterns of dental antibiotic prescribing in 2017: Australia, England, United States, and British Columbia (Canada).

Our objective was to compare patterns of dental antibiotic prescribing in Australia, England, and North America (United States and British Columbia, Canada). Population-level analysis of antibiotic prescription. Outpatient prescribing by dentists in 2017. Patients receiving an antibiotic dispensed by an outpatient pharmacy. Prescription-based rates adjusted by population were compared overall and by antibiotic class. Contingency tables assessed differences in the proportion of antibiotic class by country. In 2017, dentists in the United States had the highest antibiotic prescribing rate per 1,000 population and Australia had the lowest rate. The penicillin class, particularly amoxicillin, was the most frequently prescribed for all countries. The second most common agents prescribed were clindamycin in the United States and British Columbia (Canada) and metronidazole in Australia and England. Broad-spectrum agents, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, and azithromycin were the highest in Australia and the United States, respectively. Extreme differences exist in antibiotics prescribed by dentists in Australia, England, the United States, and British Columbia. The United States had twice the antibiotic prescription rate of Australia and the most frequently prescribed antibiotic in the US was clindamycin. Significant opportunities exist for the global dental community to update their prescribing behavior relating to second-line agents for penicillin allergic patients and to contribute to international efforts addressing antibiotic resistance. Patient safety improvements will result from optimizing dental antibiotic prescribing, especially for antibiotics associated with resistance (broad-spectrum agents) or C. difficile (clindamycin). Dental antibiotic stewardship programs are urgently needed worldwide.

Dentists' preferences in implant maintenance and hygiene instruction.

This study investigated the preferences of dentists in Australia in providing professional implant maintenance and implant-specific oral hygiene instructions (OHI). General dentists were surveyed online about their preferences in peri-implant diagnostics, maintenance provision, armamentarium used, and implant OHI techniques and frequency. Most of the 303 respondents (96%) provided maintenance services; 87.6% reviewed implants regularly while 10.7% only performed diagnostics after detecting clinical signs/symptoms. Supragingival prosthesis cleaning was performed by 77.9% of respondents, 35.0% performed subgingival debridement, 41.9% treated peri-implant mucositis and 18.2% treated peri-implantitis. About 15% did not treat nor refer peri-implant disease, including significantly more non-implant providers and dentists without implant training. Maintenance armamentarium commonly included floss (76.3%), prophylaxis (73.9%), plastic curettes (43.3%) and stainless-steel ultrasonics (38.0%). Brushing (86.5%), flossing (73.9%) and interdental brush use (68.3%) were most commonly recommended. Implant OHI was repeated routinely by 57.4% of dentists who provided it. Dentists with greater implant training and experience were more likely to perform reviews and complex maintenance procedures. Peri-implant diagnostics performed, treatments provided and armamentarium varied among dentists. Implant providers and those with higher levels of training had more preventative approaches to implant OHI. Possible shortcomings in disease management and OHI reinforcement were identified.

The Practice of Dentistry by Australian- and Overseas-Trained Dentists in Australia: Discriminant Analysis of key Predictors

IntroductionOverseas-trained dentists comprise at least one-fourth of the overall Australian dental workforce. This study examined characteristics and practice differences between Australian- and overseas-trained dentists to identify key predictors that best differentiate their dentistry practices. MethodsData for the study were from the Longitudinal Study of Dentist Practice Activity (LSDPA), a survey of a nationally representative random sample of dentists in Australia commencing in 1983-1984 and repeated every 5 years. Dentists were surveyed on a wide range of items including participant characteristics, practice patterns, practice inputs, direct demand, and productivity measures. Data were weighted to provide national estimates by age, sex, and practice type. Discriminant function analysis was used to examine the predictor variables that best distinguished between the two groups. Analysis was limited to the most recent wave of the study. ResultsA total of 1148 dentists (response rate = 67%) responded to the survey in 2009-2010; 648 cases were available for the discriminant analysis. The discriminant functions for the full sample and each of the 3 age groups (<35 years; 35-50 years; and 50+ years) were found effective to separate dentists into 2 groups (Australian and overseas), with the proportion of cases correctly classified being highest for the oldest age group (89.7% for 50+ years). Female gender, type of practice (working in public sector), and working in disadvantaged areas were significant predictors, with more prominence in the 35- to 50-year age group. Practice inputs, demand, and productivity measures offered less discriminative capacity between the dentists. ConclusionOverseas-trained dentists contribute towards providing dental care to underserved populations, the public sector, and in rural and remote locations. This study provided basis to argue that policies to encourage overseas-trained dentists to contribute towards areas of need locations have been successful, and key productivity measures were also similar to Australian-trained dentists.

221. Comparison of dental antibiotic prescribing between Australia, England, the United States and British Columbia in 2017

BackgroundAntibiotic resistance is recognised as a major public health burden. Dentists overprescribe antibiotics and prescribe for unnecessary indications. Tracking and investigating prescribing practices by healthcare professionals provides insights needed to inform targeted antibiotic stewardship interventions. It is unclear how dental antibiotic prescribing patterns differs between countries. The aim of this study was to compare antibiotic prescribing by dentists in Australia, England the United States (US) and British Columbia (BC).MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study of dispensed dental antibiotic prescriptions between January 1 and December 31, 2017, from Australia, England, US and BC. Dispensed dental antibiotic prescriptions included those from outpatient pharmacies and healthcare settings. Outcome measures included the proportion of dental antibiotic prescriptions by location and prescribing rates by population.ResultsEnglish dentists prescribed 1.6 times more antibiotics than those in Australia, and dentists in BC and US prescribed around twice more than Australian dentists. (Australia: 33.2 prescriptions/1000population; England: 53.5 prescriptions/1000population; US: 72.6 prescriptions/1000 population; BC: 65.0 prescriptions/1000 population). The types of antibiotics prescribed were similar across all countries, where penicillins were the predominant class prescribed (66.8–80.5% of antibiotic prescriptions). US dentists and dentists in BC prescribed more clindamycin compared to the dentists in other countries.ConclusionDentists in the US, England and BC prescribed at relatively higher rates than Australian dentists. The findings from this study should initiate an evaluation by dentists of their prescribing practices and responsibilities regarding their contribution towards antibiotic resistance. Further investigations can be aimed at determining country-specific factors that influence dental antibiotic prescription.DisclosuresLeanne Teoh, BDSc(Hons) BPharm(Hons), Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship (Other Financial or Material Support, Scholarship awarded for the PhD candidature)

Distribution of private dental practices and dentists 2011 and 2018: Analysis by regional area.

The aim of this study was to determine whether there has been a change in access to private dental services in regional and remote areas of Australia by comparing the distribution of private dental practices and dentists in 2011 to the distribution in 2018 according to state and territory and the Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia Plus. A database of dental practices and dentists in Australia was compiled from open-access sources for 2011 and 2018; dental practices were mapped by state, Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia Plus and Statistical Area 2 census district and linked to population data. Change in number of private dental practices, mean number of dentists per private practice, population per dental practice and mean number of dentists per population by geographic location from 2011 to 2018. There were more dental practices in rural and remote areas in 2018 than in 2011. The percentage of Statistical Area 2s without a private dental practice was lower in 2018 but remained high in rural areas and increased with remoteness-inner regional 23.1%; outer regional 31.6%; and remote and very remote 48%. Growth in registered dentist numbers did not match population growth, and on average, there were less dentists per practice in inner regional and remote and very remote areas by the end of the study. There has been an improvement in spatial access to private dental services in regional areas of Australia, but slower rate of growth of dentist numbers compared to population growth resulted in poorer access to dental services and large population numbers must still travel outside their local Statistical Area 2 census district to access dental care.

Job Vacancy Data for Dentists in Australia: Advertised vacancies as an indicator of unmet need

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine whether job vacancy data for dentists might be used as part of a needs-based index to indicate levels of workforce supply.&#x0D; Methods: Advertised job vacancies for dentists were collected at monthly intervals between October 2011 and June 2019; compiled into a data base and geo-coded by latitude and longitude. The vacancies were mapped using QGIS software and their geographic locations were observed relative to Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia Plus (ARIA+ 2016) and SEIFA Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage (IRSD).&#x0D; Results: There was a slight decline in the number of advertised job vacancies relative to the population of Australia in the first 18 months of the study. For the remainder of the study period the number of vacancies per million of the population rose steadily. There were differences between ARIA+ regions; but remote and very remote Australia showed very little variation in vacancies across the study period. The percentage of monthly advertised vacancies in IRSD1 (most disadvantaged) areas was much higher (&gt;40%) at the start of the study period but by the end of the study the percentage of vacancies was relatively even across all IRSD groups.&#x0D; Conclusions: The increase in the number of vacancies per million population since 2013 implies an increase in demand for dentists. The findings do not correlate with industry and government agency reporting of an oversupply. The use of job vacancy data might form part of a needs-based index to inform dental workforce planning.

Assessment of Australian Dentists' Treatment Planning Decisions Based on Diagnosis

IntroductionAn accurate diagnosis is required for the appropriate management of endodontic conditions. It is unknown whether the specific descriptive terminology used in diagnosis influences treatment decision making. The aim of this study was to determine whether treatment choices made by dentists are influenced by the diagnostic terminology used. MethodsOne hundred ninety-four dentists in Australia were recruited through the Australian Dental Association to complete an online survey regarding 14 endodontic cases. Respondents selected treatment options based on a given diagnosis and radiograph. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (Version 26; IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) and the exact McNemar test to determine if there was a difference between treatment choices for matched diagnoses with different terminology. ResultsMore dentists chose to manage irreversible pulpitis operatively when the descriptive term chronic was used compared with asymptomatic (93.3% vs 59.8%, χ12 = 57.69, P < .005). This trend was repeated when using chronic or asymptomatic to describe apical periodontitis (96.9% vs 89.7%, exact P = .004) and apical abscesses (99.0% vs 83.5%, χ12 = 104.125, P < .005). The differences between acute and symptomatic were less dramatic but still presented significant differences in treatment choices for an apical abscess described as “primary acute” or “secondary acute” compared with “symptomatic” (82.0% and 96.4% vs 93.3%, P < .05). ConclusionsDescriptive terminology, specifically the terms acute and chronic as opposed to symptomatic and asymptomatic, used in the diagnosis of endodontic conditions did influence whether clinicians chose operative management or nonoperative management. Further research is warranted to determine the extent of this influence among dentists.

Dental services provided by dentists in Australia.

To examine the efect of age and gender ondental services provided bydentists in Australia, and compare with previous estimates across the period 1983-1984 to 2013-2014. Data were collected by mailed survey from a random sample of Australian dentists. Private sector dentists were the focus of the analysis. Data were weighted to the age and sex distribution of Australian practising dentists. The analysis was based on service logs collected from n=211 dentists. Adjusted results (rate ratio, 95% CI) showed male dentists had higher endodontic rates (1.7, 1.0-2.9) than female dentists. Dentists aged 40-49years had higher restorative rates (1.6, 1.1-2.2) but lower preventive rates (0.5, 0.3-0.9) than those aged 20-29years. Diagnostic services were lower for dentists aged 40-49 to 60+years (0.8, 0.6-0.9), while denture services were higher for dentists aged 40-49 (11.1, 2.5-48.5) to 60+years (6.4, 1.2-33.3). Crowns were higher for dentists aged 40-49 (2.4, 1.0-5.6) and 50-59years (2.9, 1.3-6.6). Diagnostic and preventive services were consistently higher across 1983-1984 to 2013-2014. Younger dentists providedhigher rates of diagnostic and preventive services. Over a 30-year period, there was a consistent trend towards higher provision of diagnostic and preventive services.

A survey of prescribing practices by general dentists in Australia

BackgroundNumerous studies of dental antibiotic prescribing show that overprescribing is a worldwide occurrence. The aim of this study was to assess prescribing practices of general dentists in Australia for antibiotics, analgesics and anxiolytics and to determine the extent to which prescribing is in accordance with current guidelines.MethodsA structured questionnaire was sent to 1468 dentists in Victoria and Queensland in July–August 2018. The questionnaire covered demographics, clinical conditions where dentists prescribe antibiotics, non-clinical factors which influence prescribing, and medicines for anxiolysis and pain relief. Responses were scored using a system based on the current Australian therapeutic guidelines. Logistic regression was used to determine the relative importance of independent variables on inappropriate prescribing.ResultsThree hundred eighty-two responses were received. Overall, 55% of overprescribing of antibiotics was detected, with a range of 13–88% on a routine or occasional basis depending on the scenario. Between 16 and 27% of respondents inappropriately preferenced analgesics over anti-inflammatories for dental pain; 46% of those who prescribed anxiolytic medicines did so inappropriately, with varying regimens and choices outside the guidelines. Years of practice was the main demographic factor influencing prescribing, with recent graduates (0–5 years) generally scoring better than their colleagues for antibiotic prescribing (p < 0.05).ConclusionsFuture interventions could be directed towards the appropriate role and use of antibiotics, shortfalls in knowledge and appropriate choices of medicines for pain relief and anxiolysis. Given that the most overprescribing occurred for localised swellings (88%), this area could be focused on in continuing education as well as ensuring it is addressed in undergraduate teaching. Continuing education on the appropriate use of medicines can be targeted at more experienced dentists as well as patients, especially those who expect antibiotics instead of treatment.Trial registrationUniversity of Melbourne Human Ethics Sub-Committee; ID: 1750768.1.

Implant education patterns and clinical practice of general dentists in Australia.

This study aimed to understand trends in dentists' implant training attendance and correlation to treatment provision. Implant-specific oral hygiene instruction coverage in training programs was investigated. A cross-sectional web-survey of dentists registered in Australia was conducted. Respondents were asked about their background, implant training history and treatment provision. Results were analysed by implant provision characteristics and graduation decade. Three hundred and three responses from general dental practitioners (GDPs) were received and analysed. The highest implant training levels attained post-graduation were postgraduate non-specialist qualification (7.9% of respondents), continuing professional development (CPD) (73.6%) versus none (18.5%), with differences between implant providers and non-providers (P<0.001), different graduation decades (P<0.001) and those restoring implants or performing surgery as well (P<0.001). University-based CPD was attended less than dental association/society or implant company CPD. Non-providers were significantly less likely to recall implant oral hygiene instruction sources (P<0.001). Most GDPs (74.9%) provided implant services, with younger GDPs beginning earlier after graduation. About 16% of respondents did not provide implants once established career-wise. Dentists might be providing implant treatments increasingly earlier in their careers. Respondents with more training were significantly more likely to perform more complex procedures, while implant training attendance trends varied by graduation decade.

Perceptions, attitudes and factors that influence prescribing by general dentists in Australia: A qualitative study.

Longitudinal studies of dental prescribing in Australia show that dentists make some inappropriate prescribing choices; literature has shown that dentists tend to overprescribe antibiotics and prescribe for incorrect indications. The unnecessary use of antibiotics is a contributing factor towards the development of antibiotic resistance. The aims of the study were to obtain a greater understanding of the perceptions, attitudes and factors that influence dental prescribing for all major relevant drug classes. Semi-structured interviews of 15 purposively sampled dentists practising in Victoria, Australia were conducted from June-September 2018. Two dentists practised in rural areas and the remainder in urban locations. The range of clinical experience varied from 2.5 to 37years, with a mean of 13years. The transcripts were analysed thematically. Dentists generally preferred amoxicillin as first-line therapy for odontogenic infections, with some confusion about the spectrum and uses of antibiotics. Overprescribing was evident, mostly due to basing judgement for use of antibiotics on symptoms rather than clinical signs. Other factors, such as time pressure, patient expectations, pressure from assistant staff, concern about online criticism and medico-legal considerations, influenced prescribing. Of the dentists who prescribed anxiolytics, most did not have a care protocol for their sedated patients. A variety of prescribing practices were described, and future interventions should target misconceptions around the appropriate use and choice of antibiotics, resources to address the shortfall in knowledge of therapeutics, patient education and staff training, as well as appropriate care and monitoring of sedated patients.

Examinations for overseas-trained dentists in Australia and the UK: formative and summative feedback.

Examinations for overseas-trained dentists are enforced to qualify for registration to perform dental practices in some countries. Feedback on the examinations in Australia and the UK is presented as formative and summative evaluations from a participant and practitioner's perspective. The formats of both examinations are analysed with the foci of the composition, implementation and standard-setting/standardisation in practical tests. The structures of the examinations are formulated in a different manner, resulting in different pass rates. Some administrative errors and loopholes are identified in the implementation. The issue of reliability is raised for the acceptability of the practical examination. Among components of the examinations, establishing the relationship and communicating with patients is more valued to practitioners trained overseas, along with medical emergency protocols for patients' safety. To better evaluate the competency of overseas-trained dentists in Australia and the UK, three suggestions are proposed. Firstly, the examination governing body should ask for and refer to feedback from actively practising dentists passing through the qualification process. Next, the examinations should redirect the target of competency from dental manikin-based dexterity to a more comprehensive evaluation. Finally, the equivalent level of qualifying competency for the examinations described in official publications may need to be revisited.

Current prescribing trends of antibiotics by dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016. Part 1

Current prescribing trends of antibiotics by dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016. Part 1

Part 1. Current prescribing trends of antibiotics by dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016.

Literature has shown dentists tend to overprescribe antibiotics and do not always prescribe in accordance with recommended guidelines. Unnecessary prescribing is one major factor that contributes to the development of antibiotic resistance. The aim of the present study was to assess the antibacterial prescribing patterns of dentists in Australia from 2013 to 2016. Data on dental antibacterial prescriptions dispensed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme(PBS) from 2013 to 2016 was accessed and prescribing trends analysed. The prescribing rates were standardized to the dose and population. There was a slight decrease in the dispensed use of most antibacterials from 2013 to 2016, but there was a significant increase in the dispensed use of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid of 11.2%. Amoxicillin was the most commonly dispensed antibiotic, accounting for approximately 65% of all antibacterials from 2013 to 2016, while phenoxymethylpenicillin accounted for only 1.4% of prescriptions in 2016. There were low but significant quantities of dispensed antibiotic prescriptions that do not fit with current guidelines. The data suggest that dentists in Australia are prescribing some antibiotics inappropriately and there is a preference for moderate- to broad-spectrum agents. The current PBS dental schedule is inconsistent with prescribing guidelines and may contribute to inappropriate prescribing.

Part 2. Current prescribing trends of dental non-antibacterial medicines in Australia from 2013 to 2016.

There is limited literature regarding dental prescribing preferences for medicines other than antibiotics. This study aimed to describe the prescribing trends of dispensed prescription medicines by dentists in Australia from 2013 and 2016 and assess adherence to current guidelines. Data were accessed from the Department of Health of all dental prescriptions dispensed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) from 2013 to 2016 and prescribing patterns were analysed. The prescribing rates were standardized to the dose and population. There was an overall increase in the standardized use of opioid analgesics by almost 30% over the time frame, with the combination paracetamol 500 mg plus codeine 30 mg tablet accounting for the majority of dispensed opioid prescriptions (96.2% in 2016). Dispensed benzodiazepine prescriptions increased by 14.6%. The increase in the consumption of opioids is concerning, suggesting that continuing education is required for dentists to better understand their limited role in managing dental pain and potential for abuse. The substantial increase in the dispensed use of benzodiazepines also requires further investigation and there were some drugs prescribed inappropriately and not in accordance with guidelines. Consideration could also be given to reviewing the drugs listed on the PBS for dental prescribing.