» Articles » PMID: 36482456

Mapping the Evidence for Monitoring Fluoride Exposure in Community Prevention Programmes for Oral Health Using Nail Clippings and Spot Urine Samples: a Scoping Review

Overview
Journal BMC Oral Health
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2022 Dec 9
PMID 36482456
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: There is an increased interest in identifying practical and accurate biomarkers for fluoride exposure. Due to the narrow 'dose-gap' between the benefit of caries reduction and the risk of dental fluorosis, monitoring of fluoride exposure is vital when introducing any fluoridation programme for the prevention of dental caries. This scoping review aimed to ascertain the nature and extent of the available evidence on how spot urine and nail clippings are used to measure fluoride intake/exposure, by using a unique approach of mapping the studies according to population, setting, type of study design, methodology and analytical approach in community prevention programmes.

Methods: Multiple relevant databases were searched up to July 2021 for any study designs, including randomised controlled studies, quasi-experimental studies, surveys, retrospective and prospective cohort studies, case studies, phenomenological studies, and expert opinions.

Results: The search retrieved 9,222 studies of which 155 met the inclusion criteria. A high proportion of the studies (25.2%) originated from Latin America and the Caribbean continent subregion. However, per country, China recorded the highest number, followed by India and Mexico. The majority (62.6%) employed a cross-sectional study design, and 65.8% combined participants from different age groups. Of the included studies, 82.6% used spot urine samples as a biomarker for assessing fluoride intake/exposure. Water fluoride concentration was reported in 66.5% of the studies with 46.6% of all included studies reporting a water fluoride concentration of > 1.2 mg/L. The methods used in assessing oral hygiene and dietary intake were not reported in 72.3% and 71.0% of the included studies, respectively. Only 35.5% of the included studies assessed the relationship between fluoride exposure and excretion.

Conclusions: This review revealed a large variability in the way in which spot urine samples and/or nail clippings are used to measure fluoride exposure in different settings and situations. Particularly, there are inconsistencies in the methodologies and the analytical approaches used in assessing fluoride exposure. Therefore, there is a need for more rigorous primary research studies using standardised approaches to determine the suitability of spot urine samples and nail clipping as biomarkers for monitoring fluoride exposure.

Citing Articles

The Association between Fluoride and Bone Mineral Density in US Children and Adolescents: A Pilot Study.

Kong H, He Z, Li H, Xing D, Lin J Nutrients. 2024; 16(17).

PMID: 39275266 PMC: 11397378. DOI: 10.3390/nu16172948.


Longitudinal associations between early-life fluoride exposures and cardiometabolic outcomes in school-aged children.

India Aldana S, Colicino E, Cantoral Preciado A, Tolentino M, Baccarelli A, Wright R Environ Int. 2023; 183:108375.

PMID: 38128386 PMC: 10842303. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108375.


Chronic Fluoride Exposure Induces Ovarian Dysfunction and Potential Association with Premature Ovarian Failure in Female Rats.

Tang X, Li H, Wang Y, Zeng L, Long L, Qu Y Biol Trace Elem Res. 2023; 202(7):3225-3236.

PMID: 37828391 DOI: 10.1007/s12011-023-03914-7.


Fluoride Exposure in Community Prevention Programmes for Oral Health Using Nail Clippings and Spot Urine Samples: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Eskandari F, Kumah E, Azevedo L, Stephenson J, John S, Zohoori F Caries Res. 2023; 57(3):197-210.

PMID: 37673037 PMC: 10641804. DOI: 10.1159/000533721.

References
1.
Idowu O, Azevedo L, Valentine R, Swan J, Vasantavada P, Maguire A . The use of urinary fluoride excretion to facilitate monitoring fluoride intake: A systematic scoping review. PLoS One. 2019; 14(9):e0222260. PMC: 6738609. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222260. View

2.
Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche P, Ioannidis J . The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009; 339:b2700. PMC: 2714672. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2700. View

3.
Rugg-Gunn A, Villa A, Buzalaf M . Contemporary biological markers of exposure to fluoride. Monogr Oral Sci. 2011; 22:37-51. DOI: 10.1159/000325137. View

4.
Unde M, Patil R, Dastoor P . The Untold Story of Fluoridation: Revisiting the Changing Perspectives. Indian J Occup Environ Med. 2019; 22(3):121-127. PMC: 6309358. DOI: 10.4103/ijoem.IJOEM_124_18. View

5.
Wang X, Cheng Z . Cross-Sectional Studies: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Recommendations. Chest. 2020; 158(1S):S65-S71. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.012. View