4.6 Article

Antibiotics Prescription by Spanish General Practitioners in Primary Dental Care

期刊

ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL
卷 10, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics10060703

关键词

antibiotic; antibiotics resistance; dentistry; general practitioner; endodontics; prescription habits; primary care

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to analyze antibiotics prescription habits of Spanish general dental practitioners in the management of endodontic infections. The results showed some inappropriate practices, such as a high proportion of using amoxicillin as the first choice antibiotic and prescribing antibiotics in non-recommended situations. Improvement of antibiotic prescription guidelines for general dentists is necessary.
The aim of this study was to analyze the antibiotics prescription habits, both prophylactically and therapeutically, of Spanish general dental practitioners in the management of endodontic infections in primary care. Two hundred Spanish general dental practitioners were asked to respond to a survey on indications for antibiotics prescription in the treatment of endodontic infections, being 190 general dentists (95%) included in the study. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the chi-square test. The average duration of antibiotics therapy was 6.5 +/- 1.0 days. In patients without medical allergies, most of them (97%) selected amoxicillin as the antibiotic of the first choice, alone (51.1%) or associated with clavulanic acid (45.8%); in patients with penicillin allergies, the drug of choice was clindamycin 300 mg (70%). For cases of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis, 44% of the respondents prescribed antibiotics, in the scenario of prophylactic antibiotic prescription, up to 27% of the general dentists prescribe according to non-current guidelines (1 g 1 h before or 1 g 1 h before and 1 g 1 h after) in non-indicated cases (16% in patients taking oral bisphosphonates). It is necessary to improve the antibiotic prescription habits of Spanish general dentists in endodontics.

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

4.6
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