Children's dental anxiety in the United Kingdom in 2003.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of dental anxiety among a representative sample of children in the UK was determined in the Children's Dental Health survey of 2003. AIMS: This paper is concerned with the extent to which children in the United Kingdom are judged by a parent or carer to be behaviourally affected by dental anxiety and the factors associated with this. METHOD: The information was gathered by self-completion questionnaire distributed to the parents of half of the sample of children who were also clinically examined in the dental survey. RESULTS: Dental anxiety that was sufficient to disrupt dental attendance was reported for around 3-4% of the four age groups surveyed (5, 8, 12 and 15 years of age). Children's dental anxiety was associated with parental dental anxiety; a greater experience of invasive dental treatment and general anaesthetic; receipt of free school meals and social class. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst these findings do not necessarily indicate causal relationships, they do confirm a number of co-factors associated with dental anxiety perhaps most importantly that of anxiety with the experience of general anaesthetic for tooth extractions.

Effect of a 1-month vs. a 12-month reference period on responses to the 14-item Oral Health Impact Profile.

The length of the reference period used in surveys of subjective oral health may have a marked influence on the responses obtained. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a 1-month (RP-1) vs. a 12-month (RP-12) reference period in the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) questionnaire. Using a randomized cross-over design, RP-1 and RP-12 OHIP-14 questionnaires were administered, 1 month apart, to two samples of Finnish adults, namely people awaiting orthognathic surgery (n = 104) and non-patient workers (n = 111). The effect of the reference period was computed by subtracting RP-1 OHIP-14 severity scores from RP-12 OHIP-14 severity scores (DeltaRP). Potential order effects were assessed by comparing DeltaRP between groups completing the RP-1 vs. the RP-12 questionnaire first. Mean OHIP-14 severity scores were slightly higher when the RP-12 questionnaire was administered first, but mean DeltaRP values were below the value of 2.5 considered clinically meaningful, and all 95% confidence intervals for DeltaRP included zero. No order effects in the OHIP-14 severity scores were observed. Therefore, although a standardized reference period of 12 months is recommended, in population surveys the use of a shorter reference period does not appear to influence responses.

Can dental epidemiological information be gathered during routine dental examinations by general dental practitioners?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of gathering dental epidemiological information by General Dental Practitioners during routine dental examinations. DESIGN AND SAMPLE: Ten General Dental Practitioners (GDPs) and five Community Dental Officers (previously trained as dental examiners for epidemiological purposes) performed dental examinations of the same 10 volunteer adult patients in order to record decayed, missing and filled teeth. RESULTS: Agreement assessed by the kappa statistic showed that both the previously trained dental examiners and the GDPs assessed tooth conditions other than tooth decay consistently. Furthermore, all of the GDPs were within the range of findings of the previously trained dental examiners for missing teeth and total DMFT score. Eight of the 10 GDPs were within the range of findings for the previously trained dental examiners' assessments of which teeth were filled and seven were within the range for decayed teeth. However, the previously trained dental examiners were more consistent in classifying teeth as decayed than the GDPs. CONCLUSION: Obtaining adult oral health data during elective dental consultations in General Dental Practice as a means to gather dental epidemiological information for adults is feasible.