Dataset Information

Assessed and perceived oral health of older people who visit the dental practice, an exploratory cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To assess the oral health of older people who visit the community dental practice from both the dentists' and the patients' perspective.

Materials and methods

In this exploratory cross-sectional study the oral health of Dutch community dwelling older people was assessed. A representative sample of general dental practitioners was asked to randomly and prospectively select one older patient and describe this patient using a specially-developed registration form; in addition the patient was requested to complete a questionnaire. The oral health of older people was described from the perspective of the dentists and the perspective of the older people themselves based on the definition of oral health from the World Dental Federation (FDI]. Relations between oral health of older people and dentist and older patient characteristics were analysed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (rho) and an ordinal regression model.

Results

In total, 923 dentists were asked to participate in the study; data was available for 39.4% dentist-patient pairs. Dentists assessed the oral health of older patients as good or acceptable in 51.4% of the cases while this was the case in 76.2% of older patients themselves. The assessment of the dentist gets more negative with high treatment intensity and with older patients having certain diseases and more medication, while the assessment is more positive for older patients who visit the dentist on a regular basis. Older people's assessment of their oral health gets more negative by being female and with high treatment intensity, having certain diseases and higher use of medication.

Conclusions and clinical relevance

Chronically illness as expressed by the number of diseases and the use of medication, seems to be a risk factor for poor oral health. Older patients themselves assess their oral health differently, mostly more positive, than their dentist.

SUBMITTER: Bots-VantSpijker PC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8462729 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Dental caries, dental pain and reported oral problems influence people's oral quality of life and thus their perceived need for dental care. So far there is scant information as to the psychosocial impacts of dental diseases and the perceived treatment need in child populations of sub-Saharan Africa. OBJECTIVES: Focusing on primary school students in Kilwa, Tanzania, a district deprived of dental services and with low fluoride concentration in drinking water, this study aimed to assess the prevalence of dental pain and oral impacts on daily performances (OIDP), and to describe the distribution of OIDP by socio-demographics, dental caries, dental pain and reported oral problems. The relationship of perceived need estimates with OIDP was also investigated. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2008. A total of 1745 students (mean age 13.8 yr, sd = 1.67) completed an extensive personal interview and under-went clinical examination. The impacts on daily performances were assessed using a Kiswahili version of the Child-OIDP instrument and caries experience was recorded using WHO (1997) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 36.2% (41.3% urban and 31.4% rural, p < 0.001) reported at least one OIDP. The prevalence of dental caries was 17.4%, dental pain 36.4%, oral problems 54.1% and perceived need for dental treatment 46.8% in urban students. Corresponding estimates in rural students were 20.8%, 24.4%, 43.3% and 43.8%. Adjusted OR for reporting oral impacts if having dental pain ranged from 2.5 (95% CI 1.8-3.6) (problem smiling) to 4.7 (95% CI 3.4-6.5) (problem sleeping),--if having oral problems, from 1.9 (95% CI 1.3-2.6) (problem sleeping) to 3.8 (95% CI 2.7-5.2) (problem eating) and if having dental caries from 1.5 (95% CI 1.1-2.0) (problem eating) to 2.2 (95% CI 1.5-2.9) (problem sleeping). Students who perceived need for dental care were less likely to be females (OR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-0.9) and more likely to have impacts on eating (OR = 1.9, 95% CI 1.4-2.7) and tooth cleaning (OR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.6-2.5). CONCLUSION: Substantial proportions of students suffered from untreated dental caries, oral impacts on daily performances and perceived need for dental care. Dental pain and reported oral problems varied systematically with OIDP across the eight impacts considered. Eating and tooth cleaning problems discriminated between subjects who perceived need for dental treatment and those who did not.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Regular inspection of the oral cavity is required for prevention, early diagnosis and risk reduction of oral- and general health-related problems. Assessments to inspect the oral cavity have been designed for non-dental healthcare professionals, like nurses. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the content and the measurement properties of oral health assessments for use by non-dental healthcare professionals in assessing older peoples' oral health, in order to provide recommendations for practice, policy, and research. METHODS:A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE.com, and Cinahl (via Ebsco) has been performed. Search terms referring to 'oral health assessments', 'non-dental healthcare professionals' and 'older people (60+)' were used. Two reviewers individually performed title/abstract, and full-text screening for eligibility. The included studies have investigated at least one measurement property (validity/reliability) and were evaluated on their methodological quality using "The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments" (COSMIN) checklist. The measurement properties were then scored using quality criteria (positive/negative/indeterminate). RESULTS:Out of 879 hits, 18 studies were included in this review. Five studies showed good methodological quality on at least one measurement property and 14 studies showed poor methodological quality on some of their measurement properties. None of the studies assessed all measurement properties of the COSMIN. In total eight oral health assessments were found: the Revised Oral Assessment Guide (ROAG); the Minimum Data Set (MDS), with oral health component; the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT); The Holistic Reliable Oral Assessment Tool (THROAT); Dental Hygiene Registration (DHR); Mucosal Plaque Score (MPS); The Brief Oral Health Screening Examination (BOHSE) and the Oral Assessment Sheet (OAS). Most frequently assessed items were: lips, mucosa membrane, tongue, gums, teeth, denture, saliva, and oral hygiene. CONCLUSION:Taken into account the scarce evidence of the proposed assessments, the OHAT and ROAG are most complete in their included oral health items and are of best methodological quality in combination with positive quality criteria on their measurement properties. Non-dental healthcare professionals, policymakers and researchers should be aware of the methodological limitations of the available oral health assessments and realize that the quality of the measurement properties remains uncertain.

Project description:BackgroundPractice-based general dental practitioners routinely provide "scale and polish" or "oral prophylaxis" to patients attending their practices. Despite its routine provision, there is no evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of single-visit scale and polish, nor the frequency at which it should be provided. A recent systematic review recommended that future trials investigating scale and polish should involve dental practice patients.MethodsA practice-based parallel randomised controlled trial with 24-month follow-up was conducted. Healthy adults (Basic Periodontal Examination [BPE] codes <3) were randomly assigned to 3 groups (6-month, 12-month, or 24-month interval between scale and polish). The primary outcome was gingival bleeding with the hypothesis that 6-monthly scale and polish would result in lower prevalence than 12-month or 24-month frequency. Follow-up measurements were recorded by examiners blinded to the allocation. 125, 122 and 122 participants were randomised to the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Complete data set analyses were conducted for 307 participants: 107, 100, and 100 in the 6-month, 12-month and 24-month groups respectively. Chi-square test and ANOVA were used to compare treatment groups at follow-up. Logistic regression and ANCOVA were used to estimate the relationship between outcome and treatment group, adjusted for baseline values. Multiple imputation analyses were also carried out for participants with incomplete data sets.ResultsPrevalence of gingival bleeding at follow-up was 78.5% (6-month), 78% (12-month) and 82% (24-month) (p = 0.746). There were no statistically significant differences between groups with respect to follow-up prevalence of plaque and calculus. Statistically significant differences detected in the amount (millimetres) of calculus were too small to be clinically significant. Seventeen (4.6%) participants were withdrawn from the trial to receive additional treatment.ConclusionsThis trial could not identify any differences in outcomes for single-visit scale and polish provided at 6, 12 and 24 month frequencies for healthy patients (with no significant periodontal disease). However, this is the first trial of scale and polish which has been conducted in a general practice setting and the results are not conclusive. Larger trials with more comprehensive measurement and long-term follow up need to be undertaken to provide a firm evidence base for this intervention. This trial informs the design of future practice-based trials on this subject.