METHODS: Two villages were selected as the sampling frame based on prevalence of tobacco and betel quid chewing habit. Respondents were asked to check their mouth for presence of lesion or abnormalities. Education on oral cancer, including MSE, was provided. Subsequently, respondents were asked to perform MSE. Finally, a clinical oral examination (COE) was done by a specialist and the presence of oral mucosal lesions was recorded.
RESULTS: Almost 64.5 percent of respondents exhibited high levels of difficulty and low mucosal visualization and retracting ability, whereas 3.0 percent demonstrated high attention level when performing MSE. Prevalence of oral mucosal lesions was 59.0 percent, whereas the prevalence of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) was 9.0 percent. Detection of oral lesions by respondents using MSE was lower than detection by the gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity of MSE for detection of all types of lesions were 8.6 and 95.0 percent respectively. When analyzing each lesion type separately, MSE was found to be most sensitive in detection of swellings (10.0 percent), and most specific in identifying white lesions (97.8 percent). For detection of OPMDs, although specificity was high (98.9 percent), sensitivity (0 percent), and +LR (0) was poor.
CONCLUSION: MSE is not an effective self-screening tool for early detection of potentially malignant lesions for this population.
Materials and methods: Sixty (60) extracted sound Maxilla (Mx) and Mandibular (Mn) premolars were randomly divided into 2 groups (test and control). Artificial WSLs were produced on buccal surface of teeth and were immersed in artificial saliva for 8 weeks. Colour components (L∗, a∗, b∗) and surface roughness (Sa∗) were assessed on 40 teeth using colour difference meter RD-100 and Alicona® Infinite Focus profilometer respectively. The measurements were done at baseline (T1), directly after artificial WSLs (T2), after 24 hours immersed in saliva and application of resin (T3) and immersion in artificial saliva for 1 (T4), 2 (T5), 4 (T6), 6 (T7) and 8 (T8) weeks. SEM images analysis were carried out on 20 teeth in four time points.
Results: The values of L∗ (lightness), b∗ (yellow/blue) and Sa∗ (surface roughness) are gradually reduced to the baseline value. Whereas, the value of a∗ gradually increased with distinct treatment time to achieve the baseline value. The higher value of L∗ and Sa∗, the whiter the lesion suggesting higher degree of enamel demineralization and surface roughness. Lower L∗ values suggest a masking colour effect.
Conclusion: The material produced favorable esthetics on colour and the surface roughness of teeth at distinct treatment times. It is recommended to be used to improve WSL post orthodontic treatment.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. A total of 92 preschool children (4-6 years) were invited to participate with their parents/guardians. Nine parameters of toothbrushing behaviour were assessed from parental responses (questionnaire) and observation of child and parents/guardians (video recording). Oral examination included recording plaque, gingival and dental caries indices. BORIS software was used to assess toothbrushing parameters and Smart PLS was used to perform association with a second-generation multivariate analysis to create models with and without confounding factors.
RESULTS: Girls were slightly more (53%) than boys (47%). Children aged 4 years were slightly more in number (38%), followed by 6-year-olds and 5-year-olds. Nearly, 90% parents had tertiary education and 46% had more than 2 children. Differences were recorded in the reported and observed behaviour. Thirty-five percent parents/guardians reported using pea-size toothpaste amount but only 28% were observed. Forty percent reported to brush for 30 s-1 min, however 51% were observed to brush for 1-2 min. Half the children were observed to use fluoridated toothpaste (F oral health of preschool children.
CONCLUSIONS: Preschool children's toothbrushing behaviour was inadequate while their oral health was poor, with a significant association between the two parameters.