Background/Objectives: Oral structural and functional impairment and depressive outcomes frequently coexist in older adults, but the strength and interpretation of their association remain uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated whether poorer oral status or function is associated with depressive outcomes in older populations. Methods: Six databases were searched for observational studies published from 1 January 2016 to 5 January 2026, with an update on 19 April 2026. Eligible studies examined oral impairment as the exposure and depressive outcomes as the endpoint in older adults. Risk of bias was assessed using Newcastle–Ottawa criteria and certainty using GRADE. Comparable adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis with restricted maximum likelihood and Hartung–Knapp adjustment; non-comparable metrics were synthesized separately. Results: Thirty studies were included; fifteen contributed to the primary OR meta-analysis. In the primary model, poorer oral status or function was associated with higher odds of adverse depressive outcomes (OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.31–1.99), although between-study heterogeneity was substantial (I² = 88.1%). In the trim-and-fill sensitivity analysis, the pooled estimate decreased to OR = 1.29 (95% CI: 0.99–1.69; p = 0.0584) and no longer reached conventional statistical significance. The certainty of the primary evidence was very low. Conclusions: Poorer oral structural or functional status is associated with worse depressive outcomes in older adults, but the magnitude is heterogeneous and sensitive to small-study-effect assumptions. The evidence remains observational and of very low certainty and should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating rather than causal or treatment evidence.

Background: Dental anxiety constitutes a prevalent barrier to oral healthcare utilization, yet patient-centered data on its prevalence, symptom profile, and preferred management strategies remain scarce in Romanian adult populations. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the prevalence and demographic correlates of self-reported dental anxiety, identify the most anxiety-provoking procedures, evaluate the perceived efficacy of anxiety-reduction strategies, and characterize patient preferences for improved anxiety management in the dental setting. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted using an anonymous 18-item online questionnaire (Google Forms) among 223 Romanian adults (≥18 years), recruited via convenience sampling between May and June 2025. Descriptive statistics, Pearson’s chi-square tests, Fisher’s exact test, Cramér’s V, and ordinal logistic regression (proportional odds model) were applied (Python 3.11; pandas, scipy, statsmodels). Results: Any degree of self-reported pre-procedural anxiety was endorsed by 60.5% of respondents, with 11.7% reporting moderate-to-severe levels. In the fully adjusted multivariable model (Model 2), female sex (OR = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.04–3.14, p = 0.037) and chronic medical conditions (OR = 3.84, 95% CI: 1.21–12.20, p = 0.022) were independent predictors of higher anxiety severity, although the chronic disease estimate was based on a small subgroup (n = 13) and its wide confidence interval indicates limited precision. Tooth extractions (49.8%) and periodontal surgery (39.5%) were the most anxiety-provoking procedures. Despite this high prevalence of self-reported anxiety, 66.4% of participants had never employed any coping strategy. Detailed procedural explanations provided by the clinician were consistently identified as the dominant patient-preferred intervention across four independent survey items (endorsed by 24.7–77.6% of respondents). A highly significant association was observed between anxiety status and perceived inadequacy of staff anxiety management (χ² = 22.406, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Self-reported dental anxiety affects the majority of this Romanian adult sample, with communication-based strategies representing the primary patient-centered priority. These findings support integrating structured communication training and standardized anxiety screening into routine dental practice.

Substance use disorders (SUDs) represent a major psychiatric and public health burden. Although integrated biopsychosocial approaches combining pharmacotherapy with psychosocial and behavioral interventions are recommended by international guidelines, real-world evidence on their effectiveness in acute emergency settings remains scarce, particularly in Eastern European healthcare contexts. This single-center, retrospective, observational study examined behavioral and psychosocial predictors of clinical response and compared an integrated therapeutic strategy (pharmacotherapy combined with psychosocial and behavioral interventions) with pharmacotherapy alone among all emergency psychiatric admissions for SUDs (ICD-10 F10–F19) at the Clinical Psychiatric Hospital “Elisabeta Doamna,” Galați, Romania, between January 2020 and December 2024 (N = 331; census sampling). The primary outcome was clinical status at discharge (improved/stationary/worsened). Patients receiving the integrated strategy showed a significantly higher improvement rate at discharge than those receiving pharmacotherapy alone (98.3% vs. 76.3%; OR = 17.88; 95% CI: 5.62–56.91; p < 0.001). A hospitalization window of 4–14 days was associated with optimal outcomes. In an exploratory logistic regression analysis, older age (≥51 years) and unemployment emerged as independent psychosocial predictors of suboptimal response. These findings suggest that integrating behavioral and psychosocial interventions with pharmacotherapy is associated with superior discharge outcomes in acute SUD management; given the observational, non-randomized design, these results should be regarded as hypothesis-generating rather than causal, pending confirmation in prospective multicenter studies before informing behaviorally informed triage and risk stratification in emergency psychiatry.