Oral health inequality in Canada, the United States and United Kingdom.

The objective of this study was to quantify the magnitude of absolute and relative oral health inequality in countries with similar socio-political environments, but differing oral health care systems such as Canada, the United States (US), and the United Kingdom (UK), in the first decade of the new millennium. Clinical oral health data were obtained from the Canadian Health Measures Survey 2007-2009, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007-2008, and the Adult Dental Health Survey 2009, for Canada, the US and UK, respectively. The slope index of inequality (SII) and relative index of inequality (RII) were used to quantify absolute and relative inequality, respectively. There was significant oral health inequality in all three countries. Among dentate individuals, inequality in untreated decay was highest among Americans (SII:28.2; RII:4.7), followed by Canada (SII:21.0; RII:3.09) and lowest in the UK (SII:15.8; RII:1.75). Inequality for filled teeth was negligible in all three countries. For edentulism, inequality was highest in Canada (SII: 30.3; RII: 13.2), followed by the UK (SII: 10.2; RII: 11.5) and lowest in the US (SII: 10.3; and RII: 9.26). Lower oral health inequality in the UK speaks to the more equitable nature of its oral health care system, while a highly privatized dental care environment in Canada and the US may explain the higher inequality in these countries. However, despite an almost equal utilization of restorative dental care, there remained a higher concentration of unmet needs among the poor in all three countries.

Comparing the magnitude of oral health inequality over time in Canada and the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the magnitude of, and changes in, absolute and relative oral health inequality in Canada and the United States, from the 1970s till the first decade of the new millennium. METHODS: Data were obtained from four national surveys; two Canadian (NCNS 1970-1972 and CHMS 2007-2009) and two American (HANES 1971-1974 and NHANES 2007-2008). The slope and relative index of inequality were used to measure absolute and relative inequality, respectively. Percentage change in inequality was also calculated. RESULTS: Relative inequality for untreated decay increased by 91% in Canada and 189% in the United States, while for filled teeth it declined by 63% in Canada and 16% in the United States. Relative inequality in edentulism rose by 200% and 78% in Canada and United States, respectively. Absolute inequality declined in both countries. CONCLUSIONS: There was persistent absolute and relative inequality in Canada and the United States. An increase in relative inequality for adverse outcomes suggests that improvements in oral health were occurring primarily among the rich, while reductions in relative inequality for filled teeth indicate higher utilization of restorative services among the poor. These results point to the necessity of tackling the sociopolitical determinants of health to mitigate oral health inequality in Canada and the United States.

Racial Discrimination and Uptake of Dental Services among American Adults.

This study examined the relationship between racial discrimination and use of dental services among American adults. We used data from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, a health-related telephone cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative sample of adults in the United States. Racial discrimination was indicated by two items, namely perception of discrimination while seeking healthcare within the past 12 months and emotional impact of discrimination within the past 30 days. Their association with dental visits in the past year was tested in logistic regression models adjusting for predisposing (age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, education, smoking status), enabling (health insurance), and need (missing teeth) factors. Approximately 3% of participants reported being discriminated when seeking healthcare in the past year, whereas 5% of participants reported the emotional impact of discrimination in the past month. Participants who experienced emotional impact of discrimination were less likely to have visited the dentist during the past year (Odds Ratios (OR): 0.57; 95% CI 0.44-0.73) than those who reported no emotional impact in a crude model. The association was attenuated but remained significant after adjustments for confounders (OR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.58-0.99). There was no association between healthcare discrimination and last year dental visit in the fully adjusted model. Emotional impact of racial discrimination was an important predictor of use of dental services. The provision of dental health services should be carefully assessed after taking account of racial discrimination and its emotional impacts within the larger context of social inequalities.