Journals / Selcuk Dental Journal / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3

Attitudes and behavior regarding oral hygiene among in a group university students: A Self-reported

Attitudes and behavior regarding oral hygiene in a group university students: A self-reported

Pages
448–454
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was found that those who brushed the teeth at least twice a day brushed their teeth significantly longer time than those who brushed the teeth less than twice a day(p<0.05).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background: The aim of this study is to evaluate the factors of oral hygiene habits, tooth brushing motivation and toothpaste preference factors.Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study based on the hospital was carried out by surveying 759 university students over 18 years of age.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The demographics, duration and frequency of self-reported questionnaire oral hygiene habits, motivation source in tooth brushing and effective factors in the selection of toothpaste were investigated.The level of statistical significance was accepted as p <0.05.Results: As a source of motivation when brushing among university students, tooth loss was the most common.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was found that those who brushed the teeth at least twice a day brushed their teeth significantly longer time than those who brushed the teeth less than twice a day(p<0.05).
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Arayüz fırçası · Diş macunu seçimi · Fırçalama

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to evaluate the factors of oral hygiene habits, tooth brushing motivation and toothpaste preference factors.Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study based on the hospital was carried out by surveying 759 university students over 18 years of age. The demographics, duration and frequency of self-reported questionnaire oral hygiene habits, motivation source in tooth brushing and effective factors in the selection of toothpaste were investigated.The level of statistical significance was accepted as p <0.05.Results: As a source of motivation when brushing among university students, tooth loss was the most common. It was found that those who brushed the teeth at least twice a day brushed their teeth significantly longer time than those who brushed the teeth less than twice a day(p<0.05). The use of the interdental brush was found to be 24% in addition to tooth brushing. From all the factors affecting the motivation to brush teeth, the most important factor for the survey practitioners is the fear of losing teeth. The most important factor for tooth-paste selection is its whitening feature for the majority of all. Conclusion: The development of oral hygiene habits should be ensured considering Motivation in tooth brushing and effective factors in toothpaste selection. Keywords: Brushing, Interdental brush, Motivation source, Toothpaste selection.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı bir grup üniversite öğrencisinin, oral hijyen alışkanlıklarının, diş fırçalama motivasyon ve diş macunu tercihi faktörlerinin değerlendirilmesidir. Gereç ve yöntemler: Hastane bazlı bu kesitsel çalışma üniversite öğrencisi 18 yaş üstü 759 diş hekimliği öğrencisi olmayan üniversite öğrencisi hastaya anket yapılarak gerçekleştirildi. Kendiliğinden bildirim anket oral hijyen alışkanlıklarının demografisi, süresi ve sıklığı, diş fırçalamada motivasyon kaynağı ve diş macunu seçiminde etkili faktörler araştırıldı.İstatistiksel anlamlılık düzeyi p<0.05 olarak kabul edildi.Bulgular: Üniversite öğrencileri arasında diş fırçalama motivasyon kaynağı olarak en çok diş kaybetme korkusu bulunurken, diş macunu seçiminde en etkili faktörün beyazlatıcı özelliği olduğu tespit edildi. Günlük en az iki defa fırçalama yapanların istatistiksel olarak anlamlı şekilde daha az sayıda fırçalama yapanlara göre daha uzun süre fırçalama yaptığı tespit edildi(p<0.05). Arayüz fırçası kullanım oranı diş fırçalamaya ilaveten %24 olarak bulundu. Diş fırçalama motivasyonunu etkileyen tüm faktörlerden anket uygulayıcıları için en önemli faktör diş kaybetme korkusudur. Diş macunu seçiminde en önemli faktör, üniversite öğrencilerinin çoğunluğu için beyazlatma özelliğidir.Sonuç: Diş fırçalamada motivasyon ve diş macunu seçiminde etkili faktörler göz önünde bulundurularak oral hijyen alışkanlıklarının geliştirilmesi sağlanmalıdır. Anahtar kelimeler: Arayüz fırçası, Diş macunu seçimi, Fırçalama, Motivasyon kaynağı.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDOĞAN, M. S., GÜMÜŞOK, M., SARIÇAM, E. (2020). Attitudes and behavior regarding oral hygiene among in a group university students: A Self-reported. Selcuk Dental Journal, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3, 448–454. https://ajindex.com/articles/301519

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Davies RM, Davies GM, Ellwood RP, Kay EJ. Prevention. Part 4: Toothbrushing: what advice should be given to patients?. Br Dent J 2003; 195: 135
  2. Slot DE, Dörfer CE, Van der Weijden GA. The efficacy of interdental brushes on plaque and parameters of periodontal inflammation: a systematic review. Int J Dent Hyg 2008; 6: 253-2640.4. Addy M, Dummer PM, Hunter ML, Kingdon A, Shaw WC. The effect of toothbrushing frequency, toothbrushing hand, sex and social class on the incidence of plaque, gingivitis and pocketing in adolescents: a longitudinal cohort study. Community Dent Health 1990; 7: 237-247
  3. Christou V, Timmerman MF, Van der Velden U, Van der Weijden FA. Comparison of different approaches of interdental oral hygiene: interdental brushes versus dental floss. J Periodontol 1998; 69: 759-764
  4. Hugoson A, Koch G. Oral health in 1000 individuals aged 3--70 years in the community of Jönköping, Sweden. A review. Swed Dent J 1979; 3: 69
  5. Galgut PN. The need for interdental cleaning. Dental health 1991; 30: 8-11
  6. Poklepovic T. et al. Interdental brushing for the prevention and control of periodontal diseases and dental caries in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 12
  7. Baehni PC, Ve Takeuchi Y. Anti‐plaque agents in the prevention of biofilm‐associated oral diseases. Oral Dis 2003; 9: 23-29
  8. Macgregor IDM, Balding JW, Regis D. Motivation for dental hygiene in adolescents. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 1997; 7: 43-48
  9. Regis D, Macgregor IDM, Balding JW. Differential prediction of dental health behaviour by self‐esteem and health locus of control in young adolescents. J Clin Periodontol 1994; 21: 7-12.12. Valkenburg C, Slot DE, Bakker EW, Van der Weijden FA. Does dentifrice use help to remove plaque? A systematic review. J Clin Periodontol, 2006; 43: 1050-1058.13. Van Der Weijden F, Slot DE. Oral hygiene in the prevention of periodontal diseases: the evidence. Periodontol 2000 2011; 55: 104-123
  10. Marinho VC, Higgins J, Logan S, Sheiham A. Fluoride toothpastes for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003; 1
  11. Opeodu OI, Gbadebo SO. Factors influencing choice of oral hygiene products by dental patients in a Nigerian Teaching Hospital. Ann Ib Postgrad Med 2017; 15: 51-56
  12. Kırtıloğlu T, Yavuz US. An assessment of oral self-care in the student population of a Turkish university. Public Health, 2006; 120, 953-957