Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out on 400 pregnant women who were selected using stratified random sampling technique from eight private maternity centers located in Indore city. A questionnaire collected information on socio-demographic characteristics, oral hygiene practices, previous dental visit and past medical history. OHRQOL was assessed using Oral Health Impact Profile-14 questionnaire. Lifestyle factors were assessed using the Health practice Index.
Results: The lifestyle factors were the strongest predictor for poor OHRQOL. The pregnant women (OR = 3.22, P-value < 0.0001*) with poor lifestyle had significantly poor OHRQOL. Logistic regression analysis showed that poor socio-economic status (OR = 2.63, P-value = 0.025*), brushing frequency of less than or equal to once daily (OR = 2.02, P-value = 0.025*), and suffering from systemic diseases (OR = 2.11, P-value = 0.017*) were other important predictors for poor OHRQOL in pregnant women.
Conclusions: Our findings showed that lifestyle factors significantly impact OHRQOL in pregnant women. Thus, it is recommended that effective policies should be drafted to improve lifestyle factors and OHRQOL in pregnant women.
METHODS: Participants were 7- to 16-year-old children referred to a UK Dental Hospital for management of incisor opacities. Prior to treatment (To), participants completed validated questionnaires to assess OHRQoL and overall health status (C-OHIP-SF19), and self-concept (Harter's Self-Perception Profile for Children [SPPC]). Interventions for MIH included microabrasion, resin infiltration, tooth whitening or composite resin restoration. Children were reviewed after six months (T1) when they re-completed the C-OHIP-SF19 and SPPC questionnaires. The relationships of predictors with improvement of children's OHRQoL (T1-To) and children's overall health status at T1 were assessed using linear and ordinal logistic regression respectively, guided by the Wilson and Cleary's theoretical model.
RESULTS: Of 103 participants, 86 were reviewed at T1 (83.5 % completion rate). Their mean age was 11-years (range = 7-16) and 60 % were female. Total and domain OHRQoL scores significantly increased (improved OHRQoL) following MIH treatment. There was a significant positive change in SPPC physical appearance subscale score between To and T1. A higher number of anterior teeth requiring aesthetic treatment were associated with poor improvement of socio-emotional wellbeing at T1 (Coef =-0.43). Higher self-concept at To was associated with greater improvement of socio-emotional wellbeing at T1 (ß = 3.44). Greater orthodontic treatment need (i.e. higher IOTN-AC score) at T0 was linked to worse overall oral health at T1 (OR = 0.43).
CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial factors and dental clinical characteristics were associated with change in children's OHRQoL following minimal interventions for incisor opacities.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: MIH is a common condition and clinicians should be aware of the negative impacts some children experience, particularly those with multiple anterior opacities, poor tooth alignment and low self-concept. However, simple, minimally invasive treatments can provide good clinical and psychosocial outcomes and should be offered to children reporting negative effects.
Subjects and Methods: In an analytical cross-sectional design, we used simple random sampling technique to select 242 multiracial Malaysian male fishermen aged between 18 and 75 years from five fishing villages located at Gurney Drive, Tanjong Tokong, Tanjong Bungah, Batu Ferringhi, and Teluk Bahang to participate in this study. During four consecutive weekends in January 2017, we conducted face-to-face interviews with participants using a pre-validated, interviewer-administered WHO oral health questionnaire. We categorized participants as having "good" or "poor" oral health based on a mean cutoff score of 14. Multivariate regression models were fitted to assess the oral health status and associated lifestyle factors among the study population, using SPSS version 22.
Results: We achieved a response rate of 97.6%. Overall, the prevalence of poor oral health in this study was 47.5%. "Income" (RM/month), "type of fishing," "additional occupation," "age" (years), "frequency of pies, buns consumed," and "frequency of sweets, soft drinks consumed" were significant predictors of oral health status among the fishermen.
Conclusion: Poor oral health is relatively highly prevalent among the fishermen in our study. The oral health status of fishermen in Teluk Bahang was consistent with the national average and significantly associated with their sociodemographic and lifestyle factors. Targeted interventions are required to arrest and reverse this trend.
Materials and Methods: It was a cross-sectional study involving a two-stage sampling to select the district and villages. A total of 325 participants were selected based on convenience sampling.
Results: Almost half of the participants rated their oral health as poor or average. The mean GOHAI score was 52.96 (±7.749), ranging from 29 to 60. The GOHAI score was statistically significantly lower for female gender (P = 0.025), lower education level (P = 0.001), and elderly (P = 0.001). The GSROH score was also statistically significant with GOHAI score (P = 0.001).
Conclusions: A limited number of studies were conducted in this area, particularly in the vulnerable population of OA. Our study found that half of the OA living in the fringe had a poor GOHAI score. It is, therefore, suggested that potential study and intervention programs concentrate on the low GOHAI score group; the male, lower educational context, and the elderly.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of school dental screening programmes on overall oral health status and use of dental services.
SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 15 March 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Register of Studies, to 15 March 2017), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 15 March 2017), and Embase Ovid (15 September 2016 to 15 March 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on language or publication status when searching the electronic databases; however, the search of Embase was restricted to the last six months due to the Cochrane Centralised Search Project to identify all clinical trials and add them to CENTRAL.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (cluster or parallel) that evaluated school dental screening compared with no intervention or with one type of screening compared with another.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials (four were cluster-RCTs) with 19,498 children who were 4 to 15 years of age. Four trials were conducted in the UK and two were based in India. We assessed two trials to be at low risk of bias, one trial to be at high risk of bias and three trials to be at unclear risk of bias.None of the six trials reported the proportion of children with untreated caries or other oral diseases.Four trials evaluated traditional screening versus no screening. We performed a meta-analysis for the outcome 'dental attendance' and found an inconclusive result with high heterogeneity. The heterogeneity was found it to be, in part, due to study design (three cluster-RCTs and one individual-level RCT). Due to the inconsistency, we downgraded the evidence to 'very low certainty' and are unable to draw conclusions about this comparison.Two cluster-RCTs (both four-arm trials) evaluated criteria-based screening versus no screening and showed a pooled effect estimate of RR 1.07 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.16), suggesting a possible benefit for screening (low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference when criteria-based screening was compared to traditional screening (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.08) (very low-certainty evidence).In one trial, a specific (personalised) referral letter was compared to a non-specific one. Results favoured the specific referral letter with an effect estimate of RR 1.39 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.77) for attendance at general dentist services and effect estimate of RR 1.90 (95% CI 1.18 to 3.06) for attendance at specialist orthodontist services (low-certainty evidence).One trial compared screening supplemented with motivation to screening alone. Dental attendance was more likely after screening supplemented with motivation, with an effect estimate of RR 3.08 (95% CI 2.57 to 3.71) (low-certainty evidence).None of the trials had long-term follow-up to ascertain the lasting effects of school dental screening.None of the trials reported cost-effectiveness and adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The trials included in this review evaluated short-term effects of screening, assessing follow-up periods of three to eight months. We found very low certainty evidence that was insufficient to allow us to draw conclusions about whether there is a role for traditional school dental screening in improving dental attendance. For criteria-based screening, we found low-certainty evidence that it may improve dental attendance when compared to no screening. However, when compared to traditional screening there was no evidence of a difference in dental attendance (very low-certainty evidence).We found low-certainty evidence to conclude that personalised or specific referral letters improve dental attendance when compared to non-specific counterparts. We also found low-certainty evidence that screening supplemented with motivation (oral health education and offer of free treatment) improves dental attendance in comparison to screening alone.We did not find any trials addressing cost-effectiveness and adverse effects of school dental screening.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among school children of Grade Seven in 12 schools of Kaski district in Nepal. Schools were randomly selected from the urban and semi-urban areas in the district. Data were collected covering oral health knowledge, socio-demographic characteristics, oral health condition and practices. The factors of poor oral health condition and practices were examined using t-test, one-way ANOVA, and multiple linear regression.
RESULTS: Of the total participants (n = 669), 54.9% were females and their mean DMFT score was 1.82 (SD = 1.07). Total decayed score was higher among those who did not have knowledge that fluoride prevents decay compared to those who had knowledge about it (Being aware of fluoride prevents decay: Mean = 1.21 (SD = 1.54) versus not being aware of that: mean = 2.13 (SD = 2.13); p = 0.029). Females were more likely to have higher DMFT scores compared to males (β-coefficient = 0.43, 95% CI 0.13, 0.73, p = 0.005). In addition, higher knowledge score was negatively associated with higher DMFT score (β-coefficient = - 0.09, 95% CI - 0.20, -0.01, p = 0.047).
CONCLUSION: Being female students and those having lower level of knowledge on oral health attributed to higher DMFT index. Periodic dental check-up coupled with oral health education on regular brushing, use of fluoridated paste, tongue cleaning and care of gum diseases are recommended in schools.