Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Gesundheitswesen ; 79(4): 247-251, 2017 Apr.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27300099

RESUMEN

Aim: For children and adolescents at increased risk of caries, the "Selective Intensive Prophylaxis" (SIP) programme was established in Rhineland-Palatinate in 2004, as well as in the most other German states. This study compares the results of the school dentists' evaluations of first grade school children in 2013/2014 participating in the "Selective Intensive Prophylaxis" (SIP) programme or the "Standard Programme" (SP). Methods: The d3mft/D3MFT index was recorded by school dentists according to the WHO criteria; caries was diagnosed if dentin was affected; no radiography or fiber-optic transillumination was used. The examinations were performed once under the SP and twice under the SIP. Children and parents were informed in case of a need for treatment and reminded if the did not see the family dentist. Out of the evaluated d3mft/D3MFT values, the Significant Caries Index (SiC) was calculated. Statistical computing was performed using SPSS 22.00. Results: Of all first graders, n=25 020 were evaluable for d3mft/D3MFT. Altogether n=1 164 first graders were included into the SIP in the 2013/2014 term; for n=1 002 of those, the results for both examinations were available. The caries experience of those pupils participating in the SIP was clearly higher than in the SP (41.8% naturally healthy vs. 61.7%, p<0.0001). There was significant difference between the first and second examination in the SIP, especially with respect to individual (16.0 vs. 23.0%, p<0.0001) and tooth-related (43.2 vs. 54.2%, p<0.0001) level of restoration. Conclusion: The results show that the SIP in Rhineland-Palatinate is conducted in a population with high caries experience. The significant difference concerning the dental restoration level, both individual- and teeth-related - leads to the conclusion that children frequently sought dental treatment if a need for treatment was diagnosed by the school dentist.


Asunto(s)
Atención Odontológica/estadística & datos numéricos , Caries Dental/epidemiología , Caries Dental/prevención & control , Restauración Dental Permanente/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicina Preventiva/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicios de Odontología Escolar/estadística & datos numéricos , Niño , Caries Dental/diagnóstico , Femenino , Alemania/epidemiología , Programas de Gobierno/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Prevalencia , Factores de Riesgo , Servicios de Salud Escolar/estadística & datos numéricos , Instituciones Académicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudiantes/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
BMC Oral Health ; 15: 69, 2015 Jun 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26104387

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Fixed orthodontic appliances (FOA) temporarily interfere with periodontal health of patients, as the appliance complicates oral hygiene. The use of aligners in orthodontic therapy increased strongly during the last decade. In the literature, the reports about effects of aligner treatment on oral hygiene and gingival conditions are scarce. This cross-sectional study evaluated oral hygiene and patient's satisfaction during orthodontic treatment of patients with FOA or Invisalign®. METHODS: 100 patients (FOA = 50, Invisalign® = 50) were included who underwent orthodontic treatment for more than 6 months. Clinical examinations were performed to evaluate patients' periodontal condition and were compared with clinical data at the beginning of the orthodontic treatment. Oral hygiene, patients' satisfaction and dietary habits were documented by a detailed questionnaire. For statistical analysis, the Mann-Whitney U-Test and Fisher's Exact Test were used; as multiple testing was applied, a Bonferroni correction was performed. RESULTS: At the time of clinical examinations, patients with FOA were in orthodontic therapy for 12.9 ± 7.2 months, whereas patients with Invisalign® were in orthodontic therapy for 12.6 ± 7.4 months. Significantly better gingival health conditions were recorded in Invisalign® patients (GI: 0.54 ± 0.50 for FOA versus 0.35 ± 0.34 for Invisalign®; SBI: 15.2 ± 7.6 for FOA versus 7.6 ± 4.1 for Invisalign®), whereas the amount of dental plaque was also less but not significantly different (API: 37.7 % ± 21.9 for FOA versus 27.8 % ± 24.6 for Invisalign®). The evaluation of the questionnaire showed greater patients' satisfaction in patients treated with Invisalign® than with FOA. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with Invisalign® have a better periodontal health and greater satisfaction during orthodontic treatment than patients treated with FOA.


Asunto(s)
Encía/anatomía & histología , Diseño de Aparato Ortodóncico , Soportes Ortodóncicos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/instrumentación , Adolescente , Adulto , Niño , Estudios Transversales , Dispositivos para el Autocuidado Bucal , Índice de Placa Dental , Profilaxis Dental/métodos , Conducta Alimentaria , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Higiene Bucal , Diseño de Aparato Ortodóncico/psicología , Índice Periodontal , Calidad de Vida , Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/psicología , Cepillado Dental/instrumentación , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
Detalles de la búsqueda