Mucinex-Sinus: A Case Study

The first appointment consisted of the dental hygienist reviewing the patient's medical history with the patient and taking the patient's vital signs. The patient’s medical history revealed alcohol use, tobacco use, and no medications. However, the patient does take Mucinex-Sinus Max due to seasonal allergies. The dental implications associated with Mucinex-Sinus Max is xerostomia. Xerostomia affects the oral cavity in a negative way due to the lack of nutrients provided from saliva. The patient's blood pressure was 140/90 mmHg and pulse was 80 BPM. The blood pressure reading was stage one hypertension because the normal range for blood pressure is 120/80 mmHg. The pulse reading was in the normal range which is 60 to 100 BPM. The patient had …show more content…
Arestin was recommended due to probing depths greater than five millimeter. A night guard was recommended by the dental hygienist due to the wear on the anterior teeth. Nutritional counseling was needed due to the high risk for caries and the effect nutrition can have on the oral cavity. Tobacco counseling was necessary due to the patient being a high risk for oral cancer. Fluoride varnish was necessary due to the patient being at a high risk for caries. PreviDent was prescribed to the patient because the patient is at a high risk for caries due to active decay and a lack of access to fluoride. A referral was needed for patient X due to areas of …show more content…
Vital signs were taken and revealed the patient's blood pressure was 130/80 mmHg. The patient blood pressure is lower at this appointment, however, it is not at the recommended range for blood pressure. The current blood pressure reading is in the prehypertension range. The patient's pulse was 80 BPM and was within the normal limits. It was recommended by an instructor to retake bitewings radiographs due to overlap on the previous radiographs. It was also important to take new bitewings due to the patient's amount of decay. The retake of the bitewings was important in order to correcting detect those areas of decay. A plaque score was taken to provide the patient with individualized oral hygiene instructions detailed to the patient. The patient's plaque score was 42% and the patient's goal for the next appointment is 20%. The plaque score revealed evident plaque on the mandibular anterior teeth, therefore, an end tuft brush was recommended. An end tuft brush was necessary due to the patient having crowding in the mandibular anterior which causes difficulty in cleaning that area. An end tuft brush is also necessary for the patient's third molars due to limited access. The plaque score also revealed other areas missed after brushing which included interproximal areas. Oral hygiene instructions for flossing included having the patient show the common flossing patterns at home. The dental