ABSTRACT
Background: Motivation is a theoretical construct used to explain behavior, it gives the reasons for people's action, desires, and needs, and it drives an individual to a certain action and determines human behavior. Aim: To determine the effect of motivation on oral hygiene and caries status among young adults in Hyderabad city. Settings and Design: A cross-sectional study was carried out among 18–20-year-old engineering college students of Nagole Institute of Technology and Sciences. Materials and Methods: Intrinsic motivation was evaluated using a self-reported 12-item dental intrinsic motivation scale (DIM-S). The oral examination included simplified oral hygiene index (OHI-S) and decayed, missing, filled teeth index (DMFT index). Statistical Analysis Used: Mann–Whitney U-test and ANOVA test were used for comparison among the variables included in the study. Spearman's correlation was used to correlate DIM-S with oral parameters. Results: A total of 393 students participated in the study with majority of them being male (61.8%). It was observed that 69% of the students were extrinsically motivated and only 31% of them were intrinsically motivated. However, intrinsically motivated females had a higher significant score for calculus index–simplified and OHI-S scores. All oral parameters showed a negative correlation, except decayed component and the overall DMFT. However, no statistical significance was noticed among the variables. Conclusion: The present study revealed that to motivate people successfully, one not only has to give them information but also has to pay attention to the individual reasons which restrict their behavior.
ABSTRACT
Context: This study evaluates the antimicrobial efficacy of commercially available chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthrinses of different concentrations. Aims: To evaluate and compare the antimicrobial efficacy of commercially available CHX mouthrinses of different concentrations (0.2%, 0.12%, and 0.1%) against specific standard strains of oral microflora at full strength (FS) and 1:1 dilution at 24 h. Settings and Design: Ten commercially available 0.2% (Rexidine, Hexidine, Smilehex, Chlorhex, Hexidale, Hex, Everfresh, and Gargwell), 0.12% (Periogard), and 0.1% (Eludril) CHX mouthrinses were selected to evaluate the efficacy against specific oral microflora using agar well diffusion Method. Materials and Methods: The standard strains of Streptococcus mutans American Type Culture Collection (ATCC 21293), Streptococcus sanguis Microbial Type Culture Collection (MTCC 442), Actinomyces viscosus (ATCC 3268), Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 25923), Streptococcus pyogenes (MTCC 442), and Candida albicans (MTCC 183) were selected. The antimicrobial efficacy was calculated by measuring mean inhibitory zones formed on agar media. Statistical Analysis Used: Independent t‑test, one‑way ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and Tukey’s Post hoc analysis were used. Results: Among 0.2% of CHX mouthrinses at FS and 1:1 dilution, hexidine was effective against most of the microorganisms except with S. pyogenes and C. albicans, where Hex and Hexidale were effective, respectively. When the concentration of 0.1% and 0.12% CHX was considered, Eludril was more effective at FS against all except with S. aureus and S. pyogenes which were more sensitive to Periogard at both FS and 1:1 dilution. Conclusions: 0.12% and 0.1% of CHX mouthrinses showed comparable efficacy with 0.2% CHX mouthrinses irrespective of their formulations.
ABSTRACT
Aim: To assess the oral health status and treatment needs among elderly people aged 60 years and above residing as inmates in the old age homes of Hyderabad and Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India. Settings and Design: A cross‑sectional study was performed to determine the oral health status and treatment needs among elderly people. Materials and Methods: In order to assess the oral health status and treatment needs, the clinical assessment of oral mucosa, community periodontal index, loss of attachment, dentition status and treatment need, prosthetic status and prosthetic need was recorded based on a modified World Health Organization 1997 proforma. Statistical Analysis Used: Multi‑group analysis was done using analysis of variance. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of the 812 inmates, 431 (64.0%) of the study participants had oral mucosal lesions. In terms of periodontal status, all sextants were excluded (Code “X”) in 324 (39.9%) subjects. Out of dentate population, a majority of the inmates (219; 27.0%) presented with deep pockets (Code “4”) followed by shallow pockets (Code “3” ‑ 183; 22.5%). The majority of the subjects had no prosthesis in the upper arch (85.0%) and lower arch (86.6%). Conclusion: The study demonstrated poor oral health among institutionalized elderly inmates. Oral mucosal lesions were found to be higher and periodontal status was also poor amongst the study population.