Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review to examine and summarize the characteristics of research related to mental health (MH) screenings and/or referrals to treatment in dental practices.
METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for Scoping Reviews and searched multiple databases for terms connected with dental care, MH concerns, screening, and referral. Included articles: (1) described care provided in a dental practice, (2) described a situation where the patient is experiencing the potential MH problem, (3) did not involve dental anxiety exclusively, and (4) involved some form of MH screening and/or referral to treatment. Article analysis included a summary of key study characteristics, types of evidence, study design, and central concepts and definitions.
RESULTS: The search generated 2050 records, with 26 ultimately included. Most studies involved only adults (22, 85%), but only three (12%) reported on rurality (two urban; one mixed) and only two each (8%) reported race or ethnicity. Fifteen (58%) articles were prospective and 11 (42%) were retrospective. The studies varied widely in study designs, from 11 (42%) cross-sectional methodologies to only one (4%) randomized controlled trial. Thirty-four screening tools were used to screen for symptoms of 43 MH conditions, with depression and anxiety screened for most frequently. Few articles discussed making referrals, practice workflows, or follow-up outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Included studies provide evidence of viable options for dental practitioners regarding MH screening, referring, and conducting follow-up, but lack specificity regarding these processes. Overall, more research is needed to clarify what workflows are most efficient for dental practitioners and efficacious in identifying patients with MH concerns.
METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for Scoping Reviews and searched multiple databases for terms connected with dental care, MH concerns, screening, and referral. Included articles: (1) described care provided in a dental practice, (2) described a situation where the patient is experiencing the potential MH problem, (3) did not involve dental anxiety exclusively, and (4) involved some form of MH screening and/or referral to treatment. Article analysis included a summary of key study characteristics, types of evidence, study design, and central concepts and definitions.
RESULTS: The search generated 2050 records, with 26 ultimately included. Most studies involved only adults (22, 85%), but only three (12%) reported on rurality (two urban; one mixed) and only two each (8%) reported race or ethnicity. Fifteen (58%) articles were prospective and 11 (42%) were retrospective. The studies varied widely in study designs, from 11 (42%) cross-sectional methodologies to only one (4%) randomized controlled trial. Thirty-four screening tools were used to screen for symptoms of 43 MH conditions, with depression and anxiety screened for most frequently. Few articles discussed making referrals, practice workflows, or follow-up outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Included studies provide evidence of viable options for dental practitioners regarding MH screening, referring, and conducting follow-up, but lack specificity regarding these processes. Overall, more research is needed to clarify what workflows are most efficient for dental practitioners and efficacious in identifying patients with MH concerns.
摘要：
目的：这项研究的目的是进行范围审查，以检查和总结与心理健康（MH）筛查和/或牙科治疗转诊相关的研究特征。
方法：我们遵循了系统评价和Meta分析指南的首选报告项目，并在多个数据库中搜索了与牙科护理相关的术语，MH关注，筛选,和推荐。包括的文章：(1)描述了在牙科诊所提供的护理，（2）描述了患者正在经历潜在的MH问题的情况，(3)不完全涉及牙科焦虑症，（4）涉及某种形式的MH筛查和/或转诊治疗。文章分析包括关键研究特征的总结，种类的证据,研究设计，以及中心概念和定义。
结果：搜索产生了2050条记录，最终包括26个。大多数研究仅涉及成年人（22，85％），但只有三个（12％）报告了乡村性（两个城市；一个混合），每个只有两个（8％）报告了种族或民族。15篇（58％）文章是前瞻性的，11篇（42％）是回顾性的。这些研究在研究设计上差异很大，从11项(42%)横断面方法到只有一项(4%)随机对照试验。使用34种筛查工具筛查43例MH症状，抑郁症和焦虑症筛查最频繁。很少有文章讨论推荐，实践工作流程，或后续结果。
结论：纳入的研究为牙科医生提供了关于MH筛查的可行选择的证据，引用,并进行后续行动，但缺乏关于这些过程的特异性。总的来说,需要更多的研究来阐明哪些工作流程对牙科医生最有效,并且在识别MH患者方面最有效.
方法：我们遵循了系统评价和Meta分析指南的首选报告项目，并在多个数据库中搜索了与牙科护理相关的术语，MH关注，筛选,和推荐。包括的文章：(1)描述了在牙科诊所提供的护理，（2）描述了患者正在经历潜在的MH问题的情况，(3)不完全涉及牙科焦虑症，（4）涉及某种形式的MH筛查和/或转诊治疗。文章分析包括关键研究特征的总结，种类的证据,研究设计，以及中心概念和定义。
结果：搜索产生了2050条记录，最终包括26个。大多数研究仅涉及成年人（22，85％），但只有三个（12％）报告了乡村性（两个城市；一个混合），每个只有两个（8％）报告了种族或民族。15篇（58％）文章是前瞻性的，11篇（42％）是回顾性的。这些研究在研究设计上差异很大，从11项(42%)横断面方法到只有一项(4%)随机对照试验。使用34种筛查工具筛查43例MH症状，抑郁症和焦虑症筛查最频繁。很少有文章讨论推荐，实践工作流程，或后续结果。
结论：纳入的研究为牙科医生提供了关于MH筛查的可行选择的证据，引用,并进行后续行动，但缺乏关于这些过程的特异性。总的来说,需要更多的研究来阐明哪些工作流程对牙科医生最有效,并且在识别MH患者方面最有效.
