4.0 Review

The incidence of complications associated with lip and/or tongue piercings: a systematic review

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DENTAL HYGIENE
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 62-73

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12118

关键词

complications; incidence; lip piercing; oral piercing; systematic review; tongue piercing

资金

  1. Dutch organization that promotes oral and dental health (Ivory Cross)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This review determines the incidence of complications associated with lip and/or tongue piercings based on a systematic evaluation of the available literature. Material and Methods: MEDLINE-PubMed, Cochrane-CENTRAL and EMBASE databases were comprehensively searched through June 2014 to identify appropriate studies. The incidence of complications, as established by a dental professional associated with oral and peri-oral piercings, was evaluated in populations with lip and/or tongue piercings. The quality of the case-control studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. For case series studies, the risk of bias was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence scale. Results: An independent screening of 1580 unique titles and abstracts revealed 15 publications that met the eligibility criteria. The incidence of gingival recessions appeared to be 50% in subjects with lip piercings and 44% in subjects with a tongue piercing. Tooth injuries were observed in 26% individuals with lip piercings and in up to 37% of individuals with tongue piercings. Subjects with a lip piercing were 4.14 times (P = 0.005) more likely to develop gingival recession than those without a lip piercing. Subjects with a tongue piercing were more likely than non-pierced subjects to experience gingival recession (relative risk (RR) 2.77; P = 0.00001) and tooth injuries (RR 2.44; P = 0.003). Conclusion: Both lip and tongue piercings are highly associated with the risk of gingival recession, and tongue piercings are also associated with tooth injuries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据