The association between parents' perceived social norms for toothbrushing and the frequency with which they report brushing their child's teeth.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether parents' judgements on how often other parents brush their children's teeth are associated with the frequency with which they brush their own children's teeth, and their satisfaction with their child's brushing routine. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey completed by 297 parents of children aged 3-6. Parents were asked how often they brushed their own child's teeth per week, how often they thought other parents did so, and how satisfied they were with their child's toothbrushing routine. Demographic data were also collected. RESULTS: The mean frequency that parents brushed their children's teeth was 12.5 times per week. Multiple regression analysis tested the relationship between parents' perceptions of other parents brushing frequency (mean 10.5 times per week) and how often they brushed their own child's teeth, controlling for socio-demographic factors, and yielded a positive association (p < 0.001). There was a positive association between parents' satisfaction with their child's brushing routine and the extent to which they thought it was better than that of the average child (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Parents' judgements on how frequently other parents brush their children's teeth are associated with their own behaviour and satisfaction. Re-framing oral health messages to include some form of social normative information ("most parents do this") may prove more persuasive than simple prescriptive advice ("you should do this").

Attitudes towards establishing a daily supervised school-based toothbrushing programme--determined by Q-sort methodology.

OBJECTIVES: This study used Q-sort methodology to determine the views of staff involved in a national school-based daily toothbrushing programme. METHODS: Q-methodology is a mixed-method approach in which participants are asked to sort a collection of statements according to degree of agreement with them. Factor analysis identified subgroups of like-minded participants and revealed areas of consensus and disagreement. 24 Community Dental Service staff managing or delivering the toothbrushing programme were asked to rank 49 statements derived from previous qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Varimax rotation produced a three-factor solution with five/six participants loading significantly into each group. Groups divided largely according to staff role: Factor 1, mainly support workers (assistants with no oral-health background); Factor 2, managers; and factor 3, oral health educators (dental nurses with teaching qualifications). As staff new to the area of oral-health, the views of support workers were of particular interest. Unlike others, this group saw Designed to Smile as a unique health promotion scheme and wanted to involve as many children as possible, regardless of oral-disease risk. Managers' perceptions of issues affecting the establishment of the programme differed from those staff in day-to-day contact with the 515 schools in which the toothbrushing took place. CONCLUSIONS: This study used a long established but little used technique to ascertain the commonality of views of staff These data may be of value not only in managing the current programme, but for anyone who may be considering developing such a toothbrushing scheme.