Survival Analysis of Glass Ionomer Cement and Resin-Based Sealant Retention: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study.

Background and Objective: Sealant application is a proven method to prevent occlusal caries; however, long-term studies on this topic are scarce. This study aimed to assess the survival rate and clinical effectiveness of glass ionomer cement (GIC) and resin-based sealants (RBSs) on second permanent molars over a long-term follow-up period. Materials and methods: Sixteen patients aged 11-13 years with all four completely erupted permanent second molars were enrolled in the study. All patients attended 1-year and 3-year follow-ups; however, one participant did not respond after 10 years and was excluded from the final analyses. The oral health status evaluation was based on WHO criteria. A total of 32 teeth received an RBS (Clinpro), and a further 32 teeth were sealed with GIC (Fuji IX). The sealant retention was determined according to the Kilpatrick criteria after 1 year, 3 years, and 10 years, respectively. Statistical analysis included a chi-square test, the Kaplan-Meier method, and the Cox proportional hazard model. Results: At baseline, seven boys and eight girls participated in the study, with a mean age of 12.3 ± 0.9 years. The 1-year follow-up results revealed that 90% of the RBSs and 43.3% of the GIC sealants were completely retained, and no caries lesions were recorded (p = 0.01). The 3-year follow-up results showed that 23.3% of the RBSs and 0% of the GIC sealants demonstrated complete retention (p = 0.034). Moreover, 10.0% of the occlusal surfaces in the RBS group and 13.3% of the occlusal surfaces in the GIC group were filled (p > 0.05). A total of 6.7% of the RBSs showed complete retention. One-third of the sealed teeth (30.0% of the teeth sealed with RBSs and 36.7% of teeth applied with GIC) were filled after 10 years. The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a higher survival rate in the RBS group when compared with the GIC over the entire follow-up period (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Although the survival rate of RBSs was higher than GIC sealants, their effectiveness in preventing fissure caries in permanent second molars did not differ significantly over a 10-year follow-up.

Do Subjects from Different Occupational Groups Experience Dental Fear and Anxiety Equally?

Background and Objectives: Research into the relationship between occupation and dental fear and anxiety (DFA) is scarce. This exploratory study aimed to compare the level of DFA and its association with its predictors amongst adults from different occupational groups. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study with 422 respondents from four occupational groups (physicians, teachers, industry workers, and artists) was carried out. A questionnaire on previous dental experience using the Dental Anxiety Scale (DAS), Dental Fear Survey (DFS), and Self-Esteem Scale was self-administered electronically. The data analysis involved descriptive statistics and structural equation modeling (SEM). Results: The DFA levels differed significantly across the occupational groups, with the lowest mean scores among physicians (DAS = 9.29 (SE 0.39); DFS-1 = 14.67 (0.63); DFS-2 = 33.94 (1.69)) and the highest mean scores among artists (DAS = 10.74 (0.38); DFS-1 = 17.19 (0.71); DFS-2 = 41.34 (1.92)). A significant impact of self-esteem on DFA was observed among physicians, teachers, and artists, but not among industry workers. Multi-group analysis with SEM revealed differences in the variable association (Chi-squared = 53.75; df = 21; p < 0.001), thus rejecting the hypothesis of the same mechanism underlying DFA across occupational groups. Conclusions: Individuals from various occupations experience DFA at different levels, and there are different mechanisms underlying their DFA. These findings can provide valuable insights for dental practitioners in developing tailored approaches to reduce the feeling of DFA of their patients.

A Cross-Sectional Study of Oral Health Status and Behavioral Risk Indicators among Non-Smoking and Currently Smoking Lithuanian Adolescents.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate oral health status, behavioral risk indicators, and the impact of smoking on oral health among Lithuanian adolescents. This representative cross-sectional study was conducted among 15-year-old Lithuanian adolescents. The method of multistage cluster sampling was used. A total of 1127 adolescents met the inclusion criteria. Two originally created self-reported questionnaires were used in this study. Dental caries, periodontal status, and oral hygiene status were evaluated by four trained researchers. A p-value ≤ 0.05 was set to indicate statistically significant differences. Statistical analysis included Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, and Spearman correlation tests. Out of all the participants, 9.6% self-reported being a current tobacco smoker. The mean PI value was 1.14 ± 0.69 among all the participants. Currently smoking adolescents had more active caries lesions (D-S) than those who did not smoke (13.2 ± 16.4 vs. 9.8 ± 10.7, p = 0.023). Considering periodontal status, non-smoking adolescents had significantly lower mean PSR index scores than current smokers (0.52 ± 0.51 vs. 0.61 ± 0.50, p = 0.0298). Tobacco smoking and the consumption of energy drinks were significantly associated (OR = 3.74, 95% CI 2.66-5.26, p < 0.001) among participants. Currently smoking adolescents tended to have improper dietary habits, especially a higher consumption of energy drinks; thus, they were more likely to have active dental caries lesions, as well as poorer periodontal status, than their non-smoking peers.

Knowledge of Oral Cancer Risk Factors among International Medical and Dental Students at the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences: A Cross-Sectional Study.

The aim of this study was to evaluate knowledge of oral cancer risk factors among international dental and medical students at the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences (LSMU). A cross-sectional study was conducted among international medical and dental students at the LSMU in 2018−2019. In total, 253 students participated, for a response rate of 76.2%. An anonymous self-administered English questionnaire, consisting of 18 items, covered background information (gender, faculty and academic study year), and statements about risk factors for oral cancer and attitudes towards the prevention and treatment of oral cancer. The fifteen statements had the following answer options: yes, no and I don't know. The statistical data analysis was performed using SPSS version 22. Overall, a good, fair and poor knowledge of oral risk factors was reported by 15.02%, 56.92% and 28.06% of the participants, respectively. The mean score for knowledge of oral cancer risk factors was 10.01 (SD = 2.56), which was defined as fair knowledge. Cronbach's alpha was found to be 0.78 (a good value). Bartlett's sphericity test and the KMO index were adequate (χ2 = 677.563, p < 0.001; KMO = 0.788). This study demonstrates a lack of knowledge of oral cancer risk factors among international medical and dental students.