ABSTRACT
Identity and legal culpability hinges on age estimation in modern society. There are several biometric methods for accurate age determination that have validity in medico-legal proceedings globally. The accuracy of conventional methods should be reassessed periodically to ascertain validity in differing global societies. This study aims to evaluate the comparative accuracy of three age determination methods based on non-invasive radiographic odontometric data when applied to a sample of Saudi population. MethodsThis cross-sectional study is done on 350 subjects of Saudi Arabian population, aged between 4 and 16 years. The same set of radiographs is used in all three methods and the dental age estimation is done by trained examiners who determine the age using Demirjian’s, Willem’s and the London Atlas Method. Statistical analysis is done using the IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) software (version 19). Significance of differences between the chronological age and the estimated dental age was calculated using paired ‘t’ test (P value of < 0.05 was considered significant. ResultsThe chronological age was above estimated age by all three methods used to assess male samples. Significant difference was seen with William's method (p=0.000) and the the London Atlas Method (p=0.000), and no significant difference was seen with Demirjian's method (p=0.102). Demirjian's method estimated the age above chronological age for females while the other two methods were below in their estimates. There were significant differences only between the London Atlas estimates and chronological age in females (p = 0.020). ConclusionsAge estimated by Demirjian’s method on Saudi population is most accurate among the methods tested. Boys showed more variations than girls when the ages were measured. Changing diet and socioeconomic factors influence growth and development of children, and this can alter the anticipated outcomes of age determination by mathematical methods.
ABSTRACT
Aim: The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of oil pulling with virgin olive oil and chlorhexidine mouthwash in reducing plaque and gingivitis. Material and Methods: A total of sixty subjects satisfying the inclusion criteria were selected. The subjects were then randomly divided into two groups of thirty each. Group I used oil pulling with olive oil and Group II used 0.2% chlorhexidine as mouthwash. The plaque index and modified gingival index scores were measured at baseline, first week and second week. Results: The results showed that there was statistically significant reduction of mean plaque and gingivitis scores from baseline to first week and second week in both olive oil (p<0.05) and chlorhexidine group (p<0.05). There was significant difference in mean plaque scores between olive oil group and chlorhexidine group at second week (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in mean gingivitis scores between olive oil group and chlorhexidine group at second week (p<0.05). Conclusions: Oil pulling with virgin olive oil was found to be effective in reducing plaque and gingivitis. Regular and proper oil pulling with virgin olive oil can therefore be recommended as a routine home-based practice in promoting oral health.