ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery can cause oral health problems in individuals, such as an increase in dental caries, periodontal diseases and dental erosion, which can be avoided if oral health promotion actions are implemented. AIMS: To assess the impact of an oral health promotion program implemented among gastroplasty patients. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial involved 208 patients undergoing gastroplasty; they were divided into two groups: Intervention Group, with participation in the Oral Health Promotion Program for Bariatric Patients, or Control Group. Assessments were carried out preoperatively, and six and 12 months postoperatively. The oral conditions assessed were: dental caries, periodontal diseases, tooth wear, dental plaque, and salivary flow. Sociodemographic information was obtained through application of structured questionnaires. For data analysis, the Chi-Square, Fisher's Exact, and Mann-Whitney tests were performed - α=5%. RESULTS: Patients in the Intervention Group, when compared to those in the Control Group, presented: fewer changes in enamel (6M: p<0.0001; 12M: p=0.001), in dentin (6M: p<0.0001; 12M: p<0.0001), moderate tooth wear (6M=0.002; 12M=0.005), gingival bleeding (6M: p<0.0001), dental calculus (6M=0.002; 12M: p=0.03), periodontal pocket 4-5 mm (6M=0.001; 12M: p=<0.0001); greater reduction in the bacterial plaque index (6M: p<0.0001; 12M: p<0.0001), and increased salivary flow (6M: p=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: The oral health promotion program had a positive impact on the prevention and control of the main problems to the oral health of the gastroplasty patients.
Subject(s)
Gastroplasty , Health Promotion , Oral Health , Humans , Male , Female , Gastroplasty/methods , Middle Aged , AdultABSTRACT
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery can cause oral health problems in individuals, such as an increase in dental caries, periodontal diseases and dental erosion, which can be avoided if oral health promotion actions are implemented. AIMS: To assess the impact of an oral health promotion program implemented among gastroplasty patients. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial involved 208 patients undergoing gastroplasty; they were divided into two groups: Intervention Group, with participation in the Oral Health Promotion Program for Bariatric Patients, or Control Group. Assessments were carried out preoperatively, and six and 12 months postoperatively. The oral conditions assessed were: dental caries, periodontal diseases, tooth wear, dental plaque, and salivary flow. Sociodemographic information was obtained through application of structured questionnaires. For data analysis, the Chi-Square, Fisher's Exact, and Mann-Whitney tests were performed — α=5%. RESULTS: Patients in the Intervention Group, when compared to those in the Control Group, presented: fewer changes in enamel (6M: p<0.0001; 12M: p=0.001), in dentin (6M: p<0.0001; 12M: p<0.0001), moderate tooth wear (6M=0.002; 12M=0.005), gingival bleeding (6M: p<0.0001), dental calculus (6M=0.002; 12M: p=0.03), periodontal pocket 4-5 mm (6M=0.001; 12M: p=<0.0001); greater reduction in the bacterial plaque index (6M: p<0.0001; 12M: p<0.0001), and increased salivary flow (6M: p=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: The oral health promotion program had a positive impact on the prevention and control of the main problems to the oral health of the gastroplasty patients.
RESUMO RACIONAL: A cirurgia bariátrica pode ocasionar agravos bucais no indivíduo, como o aumento de cárie dentária, doença periodontal e erosão dentária, que podem ser evitados se ações de promoção em saúde bucal forem implementadas. OBJETIVO: Avaliar o impacto de um programa de promoção de saúde bucal implementado junto a gastroplastizados. MÉTODOS: Este ensaio clínico randomizado envolveu 208 pacientes submetidos à gastroplastia, divididos em dois grupos: Grupo de Intervenção, com participação no Programa de Promoção de Saúde Bucal para Pacientes Bariátricos ou Grupo Controle. As avaliações foram feitas no pré-operatório e pós-operatório de 6 e 12 meses. As condições bucais avaliadas foram: cárie dentária, doença periodontal, desgaste dentário, placa dentária e fluxo salivar. Informações sociodemográficas foram obtidas pela aplicação de questionários estruturados. Para análise dos dados foram aplicados os testes Qui- Quadrado, Exato de Fisher e Mann-Whitney, α=5%. RESULTADOS: Pacientes do Grupo de Intervenção, quando comparados aos do Grupo Controle, apresentaram: menos alterações de esmalte (6M: p<0,0001; 12M: p=0,001), de dentina (6M: p<0,0001; 12M: p<0,0001), desgaste dentário moderado (6M=0,002; 12M=0,005), sangramento gengival (6M: p<0,0001), cálculo dentário (6M=0,002; 12M: p=0,03), bolsa periodontal de 4-5 mm (6M=0,001; 12M: p=<0,0001); maior redução no índice de placa bacteriana (6M: p<0,0001; 12M: p<0,0001) e aumento do fluxo salivar (6M: p=0,019). CONCLUSÕES: Houve impacto positivo do programa de promoção de saúde bucal na prevenção e controle dos principais agravos à saúde bucal dos gastroplastizados.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a protocol of photobiomodulation (PBM) with light-emitting diodes (LED) on the clinical risk of bleaching-induced sensitivity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four volunteers were selected and randomly divided in two groups, placebo (PG) and LED (LG). The LG received PBM irradiation and tooth bleaching, while the PG received tooth bleaching and simulation of the irradiation. The occurrence of painful sensitivity was recorded during the dental bleaching; immediately after bleaching; and 24, 48, and 72 h after tooth bleaching. At the same measurement times, data were collected on the intensity of sensitivity (VAS and NRS scale) and teeth affected by bleaching-induced sensitivity. A questionnaire sought to measure how the painful sensitivity influenced basic daily activities. Tooth color measures were performed using subjective and objective methods. RESULTS: LED irradiation decreased the occurrence of sensitivity at all studied evaluation times as well as its intensity, with the exception of the 72-h data when both groups presented no difference. Teeth affected by bleaching-induced sensitivity were significantly greater in the PG. Color measurements presented no differences between the groups in the recently after and later measures. CONCLUSIONS: PBM with LED decreases sensitivity risk and sensibility intensity during and after office bleaching and causes no influence on the shade degree of whitening achieved. The decrease in tooth sensitivity provided more comfort and less suffering while drinking. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: LED irradiation is a promising intervention in the control of bleaching-induced sensitivity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: RBR-7hpfwj. Sensitivity intensity measured by the VAS scale (0-10) in the first whitening session (Graphic A) and second whitening session (Graphic B). Significance level set at ≤ 5%. *Mann-Whiteney U test. Columns followed by the same letter are significant different (ap < 0.001; bp < 0.001; cp < 0.001; dp =0.013; ep < 0.001; fp < 0.001; gp < 0.001; hp = 0.002).