Oral health in patients with stroke: a meta-analysis of comparative studies

Liang Nan Zeng, Wen Wang Rao, Shi Hong Luo, Qing E. Zhang, Brian J. Hall, Gabor S. Ungvari, Li Gang Chen, Yu Tao Xiang

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: This meta-analysis systematically analyzed and compared oral health between stroke patients and controls. Data source: The electronic databases of PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Medline and Web of Science were independently searched by two authors from their inception to 14 June 2018. Study selection: Eleven studies comparing oral health between stroke patients (n = 1,742) and controls (n = 1,193) were analyzed. Data extraction: The full texts of the 11 studies were independently reviewed. Data on oral health were independently extracted by two authors. Data synthesis: Mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated and synthesized using fixed or random-effects models, as appropriate. Compared to controls, stroke patients had poorer oral health: they had more Dental Caries (5 studies; MD = 2.89, 95% CI: 0.91–4.88, p=.04), but less Remaining Teeth scores (6 studies; MD = −2.93, 95% CI: −3.91, −1.95; p <.00001). Both the Plaque Index (3 studies; MD = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.14, 0.28; p <.00001) and Gingival Index scores (4 studies; MD = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.14, 0.30; p <.00001) were significantly higher in stroke patients, indicating worse periodontal status. Conclusions: Stroke patients had poorer overall oral health status compared to controls. Given the importance of oral health to overall health, further research on screening for oral health problems after stroke should be conducted and effective management strategies should be devised and implemented.

Original languageEnglish
JournalTopics in Stroke Rehabilitation
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 28 Sep 2019

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Oral health in patients with stroke: a meta-analysis of comparative studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this