Read listed here relating to the position that dentists play

CONCISE REV IEW

Antibiotics in dental put collectively: how justified are we

Sukhvinder S. Oberoi1, Chandan Dhingra1, Gaurav Sharma2 and Divesh Sardana3

1Department of Public Health Dentistry, Sudha College of Dental Sciences and Research, Faridabad, India; 2Department of Oral Treatment and Radiology, Sudha College of Dental Sciences and Research, Faridabad, India; 3Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Centre for Dental Education and Research, AIIMS, Delhi, India.

Antibiotics are prescribed by dentists in dental put collectively, for the length of dental medication as neatly as for prevention of infection. Indications for the usage of systemic antibiotics in dentistry are restricted because most dental and periodontal diseases are simplest managed by operative intervention and oral hygiene measures. The usage of antibiotics in dental put collectively is personality- ised by empirical prescription in step with clinical and bacteriological epidemiological components, ensuing within the usage of a actually slim differ of colossal-spectrum antibiotics for rapid intervals of time. This has resulted in the strategy of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in a wide assortment of microbes and to the ensuing inefficacy of steadily old antibiotics. Dentists can construct a distinction by the actually apt expend of antimicrobials – prescribing the lawful drug, on the not recent dosage and appropriate routine – only when systemic spread of infection is obvious. The rising resistance issues of most modern years are likely associated to the over- or misuse of colossal-spectrum agents. There might perhaps be a constructive want for the strategy of prescribing pointers and tutorial initiatives to help the rational and appropriate expend of substances in dentistry. This paper highlights the necessity for dentists to support antibiotic prescribing practices in an are attempting to curb the increas- ing incidence of antibiotic resistance and other facet results of antibiotic abuse. The literature offers evidence of inade- quate prescribing practices by dentists for a assortment of components, ranging from inadequate recordsdata to social components.

Key phrases: Dental put collectively, periodontal illness, oral hygiene

INTRODUCTION

Antibiotics are routinely prescribed in dental put collectively for both prophylactic or therapeutic expend. Prophylactic antibiotics are prescribed to pause diseases caused by the introduction of participants of the oral plant life to far away sites or to a local, compromised, location in a number at risk1. Typically, prophylaxis is old to pause endocardi- tis, whereas therapeutic antibiotics are prescribed largely to address diseases of the provocative and gentle tissues within the oral cavity after native debridement has failed2. Dentists prescribe medications for the management

of a assortment of oral prerequisites, mainly orofacial infec- tions3. As most human orofacial infections originate from odontogenic infections, the prescription of anti- biotics by dental practitioners has change into an impor- tant facet of dental put collectively. For this design, antibiotics account for the big majority of medicines prescribed by dentists4. Dentists’ expend of antibiotics is characterised by a num-

ber of particularities. In attain, antibiotic prescription is empirical; the clinician does now not know what microor-

ganism is accountable for the infection because cultures are now not steadily grown from the patient’s pus or exu- date. Constant with clinical and bacterial epidemiological recordsdata, the forms of microorganisms accountable for the infectious path of are suspected, and medication is sure on a presumptive basis, classic on proba- bilistic reasoning5. Antibiotic expend is also associated with adversarial

facet results, ranging from gastrointestinal (GI) distur- bances to fatal anaphylactic shock and construction of resistance. The rising antibiotic-resistance issues of most modern years are likely associated to the over- or misuse of colossal-spectrum agents, equivalent to cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones6. In consequence, a brand recent period has emerged through which some species of micro organism are proof against the fat differ of antibiotics within the interim on hand, with methicillin-resistant Staphy- lococcus aureus being essentially the most broadly identified examination- ple of this intensive resistance. These serious issues associated with antibiotic expend beget encouraged stories investigating the antibiotic- prescribing practices of dentists7–10.

4 © 2014 FDI World Dental Federation

International Dental Journal 2015; 65: 4–10

doi: 10.1111/idj.12146

The empirical and colossal expend of antibiotic prophy- laxis is clearly now not acceptable, but well-known ingredients on responsible prescribing live problematic. Within the dental crew, there has been a general model in the direction of over-prescribing11,12. One amongst the surveys in USA came upon that only 39% of dentists and 27% of physicians adopted pointers for antibiotic prophy- laxis appropriately13. Many practitioners rely on the options of other practitioners — who most steadily cite anecdotal evidence — or resolve that, when in doubt, the wise and conservative path is to prescribed14. The most modern evaluation discusses the particular prescribing

practices of general dentists near to antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures and the pointers in general old in dental put collectively for the prescription of antibiotics.

RATIONALE FOR ANTIBIOTIC USAGE IN DENTAL PRACTICE

The human oral cavity contains a actually colossal differ of microorganisms. Some authors discuss of extra than 500 various species, and Liebana et al.15 even reported that all identified microorganisms associated with humans are at some time came upon within the oral cavity as both transient (the bulk) or resident (only some) species. The micro organism that design odontogenic infections are

in general saprophytes. The microbiology in this sense is various, and 2 microorganisms with various traits could well also additionally be involved. Anaerobic and cardio micro-organisms are most steadily most modern within the oral cavity, and various cardio species design odontogenic infections — essentially the most traditional being Streptococcus spp. The microorganisms most com-

monly remoted from the oral and maxillofacial regions are listed in Table 1. All over dental caries, the micro organism that pen-

etrate the dentinal tubules are mainly facultative anaerobes (i.e. Streptococcus spp., Staphylococcus spp. and Lactobacillus spp.). When the pulp tissue becomes necrosed, the micro organism strategy in the course of the pulp canal and the path of evolves in the direction of periapical inflammation16. The peri-apical infection warrants the explanation for the systemic administration of the antibiotics.

WHEN ANTIBIOTICS SHOULD BE INDICATED

Antibiotic prophylaxis for infectious diseases of dental or oral origin is extra prevalent than the antibiotic medication of such infections. Antibiotics are now not a change for dental intervention; reasonably they’re adjunctive to clinical intervention. The significant expend of antibiotic prophylaxis in dental procedures is for proce- dures that design bleeding within the oral cavity, and admin- istration of antibiotics for such cases has change into standard put collectively among dentists14. Antibiotics are also steadily indicated in dental put collectively for treating immunocompromised patients, patients with evident indicators of systemic infection and if the indicators and symp- toms of infection growth rapidly17. Antibiotics are on the total prescribed in dental prac-

tice (i) for the medication of acute and power infec- tions of odontogenic and non-odontogenic origins, (ii) as prophylactic medication to pause focal infection in patients in danger (as a results of systemic prerequisites equivalent to endocarditis, synthetic heart valves and congenital heart illness) and (iii) to pause native infection and systemic spread among patients present process surgical oral or dental medication.

Table 1 Forms of micro organism, in response to requirement of oxygen for growth, remoted from better respiratory tract and head and neck infections23

Infection Cardio and facultative anaerobic organisms Anaerobic organisms

Cervical lymphadenitis Staphylococcus aureus* Pigmented Prevotella Mycobacterium spp. Porphyromonas spp.*

Peptostreptococcus spp. Postoperative infection disrupting oral mucosa

Staphylococcus spp. Fusobacterium spp. Enterobacteriaceae* Bacteroides spp.* Staphylococcus spp.* Pigmented Prevotella

Porphyromonas spp. Peptostreptococcus spp.

Deep neck sites Streptococcus spp. Bacteroides spp.* Staphylococcus spp.* Fusobacterium spp.*

Peptostreptococcus spp. Odontogenic issues Streptococcus spp. Pigmented prevotella

Staphylococcus spp.* Porphyromonas spp.* Peptostreptococcus spp.

Ororpharyngeal: Vincent’s angina necrotic ulcerative gingivitis

Streptococcus spp. Fusobacterium necrophorum* Staphylococcus spp.* Spirochetes

Prevotella intermedia Fusobacterium spp.

*Organisms that beget the aptitude to originate beta-lactamase.

© 2014 FDI World Dental Federation 5

Antibiotics in dental put collectively

1875595x, 2015, 1, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1111/idj.12146 by B

A L

T IM

O R

E C

IT Y

C O

M M

U N

IT Y

C O

L L

E G

E , W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [16/10/2024]. Ogle the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /timeframe

s-and-prerequisites) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for principles of expend; O

A articles are ruled by the suitable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

Antibiotics for odontogenic infections

Despite the excessive incidence of odontogenic infections, there are no uniform criteria relating to the usage of anti- biotics to address them. A substantial percentage of inconvenience of dental origin originates from acute and power infections of pulpal origin, which necessitates operative intervention, in preference to antibiotics. Non- indicated clinical cases for antibiotic expend, that are steadily practised by dentists, embody acute periapi- cal infection, dry socket and pulpitis18. The clinical instances that require antibiotic ther-

apy on empirical basis are restricted, and in utter that they embody oral infection accompanied by elevated body tempera- ture and evidence of systemic spread, equivalent to lymph- adenopathy and trismus19. Facial cellulitis, that could well also or could well now not be associated with dysphagia, is a serious illness that desires to be handled promptly by antibiotics thanks to the chance of spread of infection via lymph and blood circulation, with the strategy of septicaemia. Chronic inflammatory periodontal prerequisites attain

now not require routine expend of antibiotics; systemic antimi- crobials ought to only be old in acute periodontal con- ditions where drainage or debridement is now not doable, where there is native spread of the infection or where systemic spread has occurred9. Whereas some authors affirm the pure and

semisynthetic penicillins (amoxicillin) to be the alternate options of first choice20, others make a selection the mix of amoxicillin and clavulanic acid owing to the lengthen in resistance to the penicillins and low stage of bacterial resistance to this combination, with a colossal-spectrum movement, pharmacokinetic profile, tolerance and dosing characteristics21. Penicillinase-resistant penicillin or an ampicillin-be pleased

spinoff is prescribed for infections caused by penicillinase-producing Staphylococcus spp. or those intelligent gram-detrimental micro organism. Sufferers allergic to penicillin are handled with clindamycin 300 mg (65%), which is the drug of preference, azithromycin (15%) or metronidazole-spiramycin combination (13%)22. Some authors beget proposed clindamycin as the drug of preference in peep of its correct absorption, low incidence of bacterial resistance and the excessive antibi- otic concentrations reached in bone23. The antibiotics precious for treating patients with odontogenic infec- tions are listed in Table 2.

Antibiotics for non-odontogenic infection

Non-odontogenic infections require prolonged take care of- ment. Such infections embody tuberculosis (TB), syphi- lis, leprosy and non-particular infections of the mucosal membranes, muscle groups and fascia, salivary glands and bone.

Unusual synthetic antibiotics, equivalent to fluoroquinolones, are the drug of preference for management of non-odon- togenic infections and are indicated for bone and joint infections, genitourinary (GU) tract infections and respiratory tract infections and lengthen the bacterial spectrum to incorporate gram-detrimental bacilli, gram-sure cardio cocci and, within the case of third-abilities flu- oroquinolones (moxifloxacin), anaerobic organisms24. Bone and anaerobic infections are managed by prescribing clindamycin (orally) or lincomycin (paren- terally)25. Within the case of a significant oral tubercular lesion, an

empirical medication given for TB can cure the oral tubercular lesion, even within the absence of histopatho- logical evidence26. The medication of particular infections caused by mycobacteria requires the usage of antibiotics for long intervals of time (6 months to 2 years) and entails the administration of dapsone, clofazimine and rifampicin for leprosy, and associations of etham- butol, isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide and strepto- mycin for TB27.

Prophylactic expend of antibiotics

Prophylactic antibiotics, taken earlier than a assortment of dental procedures, were advocated (i) to decrease the probability of postoperative native issues (equivalent to infections or dry socket) or serious systemic issues (equivalent to infective endocarditis), (ii) in surgical excision of benign tumours and (iii) in immu- nocompromised patients.

Prophylaxis against systemic spread

The usage of antibiotics as prophylaxis for focal infec- tion is a typical put collectively. Though the aptitude

Table 2 Antibiotics steadily old to address odonto- genic infections

Antibiotic Administration route

Posology

Amoxicillin p.o. 500 mg/8 hours 1000 mg/12 hours

Amoxicillin/ clavulanic acid

p.o. or i.v. 500–875 mg/8 hours* 2000 mg/12 hours* 1000–2000 mg/8 hours†

Clindamycin p.o. or i.v. 300 mg/8 hours* 600 mg/8 hours†

Azithromycin p.o. 500 mg/24 hours, three consecutive days

Ciprofloxacin p.o. 500 mg/12 hours Metronidazole p.o. 500–750 mg/8 hours Gentamycin i.m. or i.v. 240 mg/24 hours Penicillin i.m. or i.v. 1.2–2.4 million IU/24 h‡

Up to 24 million IU/24 hours†

i.m., intramuscular; i.v., intravenous; p.o., per os (oral). *p.o. administration. †i.v. administration. ‡i.m. administration.

6 © 2014 FDI World Dental Federation

Oberoi et al.

1875595x, 2015, 1, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1111/idj.12146 by B

A L

T IM

O R

E C

IT Y

C O

M M

U N

IT Y

C O

L L

E G

E , W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [16/10/2024]. Ogle the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /timeframe

s-and-prerequisites) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for principles of expend; O

A articles are ruled by the suitable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

exists for oral microorganisms to seed and infect dis- tant tissues after oral procedures, there is never any substan- tiated evidence that this occurs. Consequently, the predicament of when and for what prerequisites systemic pro- phylactic antibiotics are obligatory is controversial. Infective endocarditis is an strange, but serious

and most steadily lifestyles-threatening, situation. Some stories beget proven that dental procedures are trigger fac- tors for few cases of endocarditis28. Lockhart reported an increased incidence of infective endocar- ditis following dental extraction and periodontal sur- gery29. Ottent et al. reported that bacteraemia was associated with 74% of patients following enamel extraction30. The American Heart Association (AHA) 2007

guideline31 recommends infective endocarditis prophy- laxis only for those whose underlying cardiac condi- tions are associated with the very ideal possibility of an detrimental . Such prerequisites embody: the pres- ence of prosthetic heart valves; old ancient previous of infective endocarditis; unrepaired cyanotic congenital heart illness; within the 6-month length following total restore of a congenital heart defect with pros- thetic cloth or a tool; repaired congenital heart illness with residual defects or adjoining to the placement of a prosthetic patch or tool; and cardiac transplanta- tion recipients who fabricate valvulopathy. Despite the incontrovertible fact that all patients in danger of setting up infective

endocarditis got antibiotic prophylaxis, it might perhaps perhaps perhaps well also only pause 5.3% of cases28. There might perhaps be a better probability of bacteraemia associated to traditional each day actions than from dental procedures32; attributable to this fact, some argue that the period of antibiotic prophylaxis is over33. Within the case of bacterial endocarditis (infective endocarditis), the absolute possibility rate after dental take care of- ment, even in at-possibility patients, is believed about very low34. This is per most modern pointers from the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy35, which instructed that only patients within the excessive- possibility class require protection with Antibiotics. No longer too long ago, the AHA36 has also offered the discover-

ing recent talking ingredients for clinicians: infective endo- carditis is design extra likely to occur following frequent publicity to random bacteraemias associated with each day actions than from bacteraemia caused by a dental, GI tract or GU tract design; prophylaxis could well also pause an exceedingly little assortment of cases of infective endocarditis, if any, in of us that endure a dental, GI tract or GU tract design; the probability of antibiotic-associated detrimental events exceeds the bene- match, if any, from prophylactic antibiotic remedy; and upkeep of optimum oral health and hygiene could well also decrease the incidence of bacteraemia from each day activi- ties and is extra well-known than prophylactic antibiot- ics for a dental design to decrease the probability of infective endocarditis.

Prophylaxis against native infection

Prophylaxis of native infection is taken to comprise the administration of antibiotics on a pre-, intra- or postoperative basis, to pause the proliferation and dissemination of micro organism internal and from the surgi- cal wound. Diversified surgical procedures are routinely coated by administration of systemic antimicrobials, at the side of impacted third molars, orthognathic sur- gery, implant surgical operation and periapical surgical operation. The evidence for antibiotics acting to pause

infection of surgical wounds within the mouth is downhearted to non-existent, indicating that pre-operative parenteral antibiotic prophylaxis for routine third-molar surgical operation in medically match patients is unwarranted37. For many dentoalveolar surgical procedures in match, non-medically compromised patients, antibiotic prophylaxis is now not required or recommended35. Immunocompromised patients symbolize a obvious

class of patients for dental professionals because such patients are extra liable to bacteraemia, that could well also like a flash consequence in septicaemia. Subsequently, antibiotic prophylaxis is also given in such cases. Antibiotic protection is also needed in patients with uncon- trolled diabetes, who need to endure invasive dental treatment38. There might perhaps be now not any scientific basis for recommending sys-

temic antibiotic prophylaxis earlier than invasive dental medication in patients with entire joint prostheses39. Per the American Dental Association and the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, eval- uation is required of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with entire joint prostheses within the presence of immune deficiency40. The usage of antibiotics in endodontics desires to be indicated for those patients with indicators of native infection and fever41.

APPROPRIATE SELECTION OF ANTIBIOTIC: DOSAGE AND DURATION

Oral antibiotics that are effective against odontogenic infections embody penicillin, clindamycin, erythromy- cin, cefadroxil, metronidazole and the tetracyclines42. The kind of antibiotic chosen and its dosage are depending on the severity of infection and the pre- dominant kind of causative micro organism. The most steadily old antibiotics in dental prac-

tice, penicillins steadily, were came upon to be essentially the most steadily prescribed antibiotics by dentists43; essentially the most neatly-liked antibiotic was amoxicillin7, adopted by penicillin V10, metronidazole and the mix of amoxicillin and clavulanic acid44. Sufferers who’re allergic to penicillin ought to earnings

from clindamycin; which is active against some oral anaerobic and facultative micro organism and has the advan- tage of correct bone penetration. Nonetheless, rising

© 2014 FDI World Dental Federation 7

Antibiotics in dental put collectively

1875595x, 2015, 1, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1111/idj.12146 by B

A L

T IM

O R

E C

IT Y

C O

M M

U N

IT Y

C O

L L

E G

E , W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [16/10/2024]. Ogle the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /timeframe

s-and-prerequisites) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for principles of expend; O

A articles are ruled by the suitable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

the dose of this antibiotic could well also lengthen the chance of grand facet results equivalent to neutropenia and pseudo- membranous colitis45. The actual length of antibiotic medication is the

shortest cycle able to combating every clinical and microbiological relapse. Most acute infections are resolved internal 3–7 days. When oral antibiotics are old, a excessive dose desires to be thought about to help attain therapeutic phases extra rapidly46. In most modern years, extra attention has been given to

quick classes of antibiotic. Rubenstein defined that quick-path antibiotic remedy requires antibiot- ics to beget particular traits, equivalent to: quick onset of movement; bactericidal exercise; lack of propen- sity to induce resistant mutants; ease of penetration into tissues; exercise against non-dividing micro organism; unaffected by detrimental infection prerequisites (low pH, anaerobiasis, presence of pus, and heaps others.); administration at an optimum dose; and an optimum dosing regi- men47.

CONDITIONS NOT WARRANTING/ CONTRAINDICATIONS FOR THE USE OF ANTIBIOTICS

Consideration for antibiotic prophylaxis desires to be given in patients with kidney and/or liver failure and in pregnant or lactating moms (as antibiotics could well also beget an indirect attain on their infants). Dose alter- ments are required for dental procedures in patients with kidney failure to steer clear of an increased plasma con- centration of the drug. With reference to all antibiotics, rather then cloxacillin, clindamycin, metronidazole and macro- lides, require dose modification in patients with renal insufficiency48. Dose adjustment could well also additionally be performed by decreasing the amount administered in every dose or by rising the interval between doses (with out modi- fying the amount of drug)49. Sufferers with liver failure require a dose cut worth

of erythromycin, clindamycin, metronidazole and anti-tuberculosis medicines. Oral zinc supplementation is well-known in hepatic encephalopathy and as a consequence improves patients’ health-associated quality of life50. With reference to all antibiotics are contraindicated for the length of

being pregnant as a results of their main facet results. Risk of getting a spontaneous abortion for the length of the early being pregnant are associated with gestational expend of dic- lofenac, naproxen, celecoxib, ibuprofen and rofecox- ib, by myself or in combination51. Typically, all antibiotics can design three doable

issues for nursing infants. First, they’re going to modify the bowel plant life and alter intestine defence mechanisms; this can lead to diarrhoea and malabsorption of nutri- ents. Second, they could well also beget narrate results that could well also or could well now not be dose associated. Lastly, and most steadily disregarded, is that antibiotics can alter and interfere with microbio-

logical tradition, ensuing in babies being investigated for sepsis52.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Antibiotic remedy is required and main in medi- cine and dentistry. Dentists are now not continually responsive to essentially the most most modern clinical pointers relating to antibi- otic prophylaxis, even supposing pointers are on hand. This is the design within the motivate of the empirical prescription of antibiotics and the detrimental penalties of antibiotic expend. Antibiotic expend is also associated with unfavour- ready facet results, ranging from gastrointestinal distur- bances to fatal anaphylactic shock and construction of anti-microbial resistance. Minimising the occur- rence of antibiotic misuse and abuse has world impli- cations for the containment of antibiotic-resistant traces of micro organism. Pattern of resistance to medicines by microbes is a

pure phenomenon but is enhanced by the inap- propriate expend of antimicrobials. About a traces that are naturally resistant and those with obtained resistance emerge as the dominant forms as a results of the selec- tive rigidity exerted following publicity to antimicro- bials53. The antibiotic sensitivity of the micro organism came upon throughout the oral cavity is gradually decreasing, and a increasing assortment of resistant traces were detected – particularly Porphyromonas and Prevotel- la54 – though the phenomenon has also been reported for Streptoccocus viridans and for medicines equivalent to the macrolides, penicillin and clindamycin55. Resis- tance has been reported against all beta-lactam antibi- otics (at the side of penicillin derivatives and cephalosporins), clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, erythro- mycin and tetracycline56. The real expend of antibiotics is associated to the prin-

ciples of infection management, microbiology of infectious agent and host response, and the pharma- cology of the particular agent. Within the clinical surroundings, these principles are modulated by a assortment of components. These components wish to be understood to construct particular appro- priate prescribing of antibiotics.

Acknowledgement

None declared.

Conflicts of curiosity

None declared.

REFERENCES

1. Dajani AS, Taubert KA, Wilson W et al. Prevention of bacterial endocarditis: options of American heart association. J Am Dent Assoc 1997 277: 1794–1801.

8 © 2014 FDI World Dental Federation

Oberoi et al.

1875595x, 2015, 1, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1111/idj.12146 by B

A L

T IM

O R

E C

IT Y

C O

M M

U N

IT Y

C O

L L

E G

E , W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [16/10/2024]. Ogle the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /timeframe

s-and-prerequisites) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for principles of expend; O

A articles are ruled by the suitable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

2. Magnificent DH, Hammond BF, Loesche WJ. Scientific expend of antibiotics in dental put collectively. Int J Antimicrob Agents 1998 9: 235–238.

3. Dar-Odeh N, Ryalat S, Shayyab M et al. Prognosis of clinical recordsdata of dental patients attending Jordan University Hospi- tal: documentation of drug prescriptions and native anesthetic injections. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2008 4: 1111–1117.

4. Lewis MA. Why we should always decrease dental prescription of antibiot- ics: European Union Antibiotic Consciousness Day. Br Dent J 2008 205: 537–538.

5. Vallano A, Izarra A. Principios de terap�eutica antimicrobiana. Treatment 2006 9: 3196–3203.

6. Wise R, Hart T, Vehicles O et al. Antimicrobial resistance is a major threat to public health. BMJ 1998 317: 609–610.

7. Palmer NO, Martin MV, Pealing R et al. An prognosis of antibi- otic prescriptions from general dental practitioners in England. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000 46: 1033–1035.

8. Palmer NO, Martin MV, Pealing R et al. Paediatric antibiotic prescribing by general dental practitioners in England. Int J Paediatr Dent 2001 11: 242–248.

9. Addy M, Martin MV. Systemic antimicrobials within the medication of power periodontal diseases: a jam. Oral Dis 2003 9: 38–44.

10. Demirbas F, Gjermo PE, Preus HR. Antibiotic prescribing prac- tices among Norwegian dentists. Acta Odontol Scand 2006 64: 355–359.

11. Epstein JB, Chong S, Le ND. A ogle of antibiotic expend in den- tistry. J Am Dent Assoc 2000 131: 1600–1609.

12. Jaunay T, Sambrook P, Goss A. Antibiotic prescribing practices by South Australian general dental practitioners. Aust Dent J 2000 forty five: 179–186.

13. Nelson CL, Van Blaricum CS. Doctor and dentist compli- ance with American