↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotic Prescribing Patterns Among Dental Professionals In Massachusetts.

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Dentistry, January 2019
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Antibiotic Prescribing Patterns Among Dental Professionals In Massachusetts.
Published in
Pediatric Dentistry, January 2019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sivabalan Vasudavan, Brandon Grunes, John Mcgeachie, Andrew L Sonis

Abstract

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to investigate prescribing patterns of antibiotics for the management of common pediatric oral infections, and to and identify the independent predictors of antibiotic preference across different groups of dental practitioners in Massachusetts, USA. Methods: A cross-sectional survey assessed antibiotic prescribing practices of general dentists, pediatric dentists, endodontists, and oral surgeons based on a series of clinical scenarios where antibiotic coverage may be warranted. Results: The appropriate therapeutic management of patients with facial cellulitis occurred across all clinical groups. Endodontists were least likely to prescribe antibiotics for patients with irreversible pulpitis, and those with pulpal necrosis with associated parulis. Seventy-four percent of respondents prescribed antibiotics for patients suffering from pericoronitis and trismus. Conclusion: With the exception of the management of facial cellulitis, adherence to published guidelines for the prescription of antibiotics is low. Specifically, antibiotics are being prescribed too often for patients with tooth pain or localized abscesses and infrequently when the systemic spread of infection is less obvious, such as with trismus but no fever. Universally promulgated guidelines formulated by professional bodies may lead to improved adherence and a reduction in negative outcomes resulting from the overprescription of antibiotics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 July 2019.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Dentistry
#262
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#401,127
of 463,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Dentistry
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 463,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.