Background: In multicultural healthcare systems such as the Italian one, migrant children may experience dental care as particularly stressful because linguistic and cultural barriers can limit communication, emotional expression, and understanding of the clinical setting. Aim: Understanding the emotional experience of migrant children during dental visits is essential for improving clinical management in pediatric dentistry and orthodontics within multicultural contexts. Because linguistic barriers often limit verbal communication, this study aimed to explore children’s mental representations, emotional states, and perceptions of the dental environment through drawing and to evaluate the clinical implications for communication and therapeutic collaboration. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted in Italy between 2016 and 2025 and analyzed 50 drawings produced by 50 foreign-born migrant children aged 6–13 years, recruited through an educational cooperative in Piacenza. Most participants originated from developing countries and had limited proficiency in Italian, frequently showing a marked “experience gap” in drawing ability that interfered with normative developmental stages described by Lowenfeld. The analysis focused on spatial organization, line quality, color use, posture, interpersonal distance, and representation of the clinical environment, integrating graphic competence assessment with emotional interpretation. Results: Younger children commonly depicted rigid lines, essential settings, and oversized dental unit lamps, whereas older children increasingly represented threatening or disproportionate instruments, aggressive dentists, and omission of the patient figure. Around age 10, drawings became more detailed and colorful, although symbols of closure, such as locked doors, persisted. In adolescents, representations polarized between rich, coherent scenes and extremely essential drawings dominated by fear, rigidity, minimal environments, and symbols of constraint. The findings suggest that drawing may represent a valuable non-verbal clinical and communicative resource for exploring migrant children’s emotional experience of dental care and for identifying signs of anxiety and vulnerability that may not emerge through verbal interaction alone. Conclusions: These findings support the value of a culturally sensitive dental approach integrating drawing, visual aids, multilingual educational materials, and play-based strategies to reduce communication barriers and improve cooperation in migrant children receiving pediatric dental and orthodontic care.

Introduction: Breastfeeding is widely recognized for its benefits to infant health, yet its potential effects on maternal oral health are rarely addressed. Methods: This observational longitudinal study evaluated 90 postpartum period mothers, divided into breastfeeding ( n = 55) and formula-feeding ( n = 35) groups, assessing periodontal and microbiological parameters at baseline postpartum (T0), 15 ± 2 days (T1), 40 ± 3 days (T2), and six months postpartum (T3). All participants received standardized oral hygiene education. Results: While both groups improved initially, formula-feeding mothers showed progressive improvement through 6 months. In breastfeeding mothers, GBI (bleeding index) increased again at T3 vs. T2, whereas PI (plaque index) returned to T1 levels and S. mutans and Lactobacilli decreased by T3; however, at T3 the BF (breastfeeding) group still showed higher PI/GBI and cariogenic bacteria than FF (formula feeding). Discussion: These results suggest that the cumulative physical and psychological strain associated with breastfeeding may be associated with reduced oral-hygiene adherence, showing an association with maternal oral health. Targeted oral prevention strategies and inclusion of maternal dental monitoring in perinatal care protocols may help mitigate these risks without compromising the recognized benefits of breastfeeding.

Background: Pharmacological agents may interfere with the biological processes underlying orthodontic tooth movement (OTM), potentially affecting treatment duration, pain control, and periodontal outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO. Human studies were prioritized to assess clinically relevant effects on OTM and pain, while animal and in vitro studies were included to support biological interpretation. Results: Sixty-four studies were included. Human evidence indicates that NSAIDs effectively reduce orthodontic pain but may decrease the rate of tooth movement in a dose-dependent manner. Antiresorptive drugs, particularly bisphosphonates, were consistently associated with reduced OTM. Topical antimicrobials, fluoride agents, and probiotics improved periodontal and enamel outcomes without significantly affecting tooth movement. Most evidence derived from preclinical models showed mechanistic consistency but limited clinical applicability. Overall certainty of evidence ranged from low to very low. Conclusions: Pharmacological agents can influence orthodontic outcomes, particularly pain perception and tooth movement rate. A thorough medication history is essential during orthodontic treatment planning. Current evidence remains limited, highlighting the need for well-designed clinical trials to support personalized orthodontic care.

The biocompatibility of orthodontic materials is crucial for patient safety, especially concerning their possible mutagenic effects. This study aimed to assess the mutagenic potential of three commercially available orthodontic resins using the Ames test. We tested Resin A, Resin B, and Resin C, which consist of a base and an accelerator component. We used Salmonella typhimurium strains TA98, TA100, TA1535, and TA1537, along with TA1538, both with and without metabolic activation (S9 mix), following standardized protocols. After 48 h, we counted the number of revertant colonies and analyzed the data using two-way ANOVA. The Ames test revealed that Resins A and B induced significant mutagenic activity in strains TA100 and TA1535, with increases in revertant colonies up to about +145% compared with controls, while no effects were observed in TA98, TA1537, or TA1538. Resin C (both the complete mix and the base component) also showed mutagenicity in TA100 and TA1535, whereas the accelerator alone was consistently non-mutagenic. Positive controls confirmed the test system’s sensitivity. In conclusion, some orthodontic resins and their components showed mutagenic activity under the tested conditions. This highlights the need for mutagenicity testing as part of the biological safety assessment of dental materials.

Background: Malocclusion can influence not only oral function, but also adolescents’ perception of dental appearance, psychosocial status, and oral health-related quality of life. The present cross-sectional study aimed to examine the association between the clinical severity of malocclusion and adolescents’ self-perception, as well as to assess the level of agreement between clinician and patient ratings of aesthetic impairment. Methods: The study included 160 consecutive adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who were referred for orthodontic evaluation. Malocclusion severity was determined using the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN), considering both the Dental Health Component (DHC) and the Aesthetic Component (AC). Patients’ perceptions of malocclusion severity, aesthetic concerns, and functional limitations were collected through numeric rating scales, while psychosocial impact was measured using the Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ). Correlations were examined with Spearman’s coefficients, agreement between clinician- and self-rated AC scores was evaluated with weighted kappa statistics, and multivariable regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of patient-reported outcomes. Results: Moderate positive correlations emerged between IOTN-DHC and self-perceived malocclusion severity (rho = 0.42, p < 0.001), and between clinician-rated IOTN-AC and self-perceived severity (rho = 0.47, p < 0.001). Associations were stronger for aesthetic and psychosocial measures than for functional complaints, with the highest correlation observed between clinician-rated IOTN-AC and perceived aesthetic impact (rho = 0.58, p < 0.001). Greater clinical severity was also associated with increased psychosocial burden, as reflected by higher PIDAQ total scores. Agreement between clinician and patient evaluations of aesthetic impairment was fair to moderate (weighted kappa = 0.34) but improved when AC scores were grouped into broader categories (weighted kappa = 0.46). Overall, adolescents tended to perceive their dental aesthetic impairment as more severe than did clinicians. In the multivariable models, clinician-rated IOTN-AC remained an independent predictor of perceived severity, aesthetic impact, and psychosocial burden. Conclusions: Clinical measures of malocclusion severity and adolescents’ self-perception were significantly related, although they reflected partly different aspects of orthodontic treatment need. Combining normative clinical indices with patient-reported outcomes may allow a more complete and patient-centred evaluation of malocclusion.