Journals / Cumhuriyet Dental Journal / 2015 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 1

İlköğretİm okullarında standart bİr koruyucu yöntem olarak fırça İle flor jel uygulamasının değerlendİrİlmesİ: dört yıllık alan çalışması sonuçları

As a standart preventive method brush- on fluoride application in primary schools: Four years field study results

Pages
37–46
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

However, various primitive preventive methods could need to besupported by the risk-based additional preventive applications in high risk population.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the medium-and long-term effect ofbrush on fluoride gel application which is a simplified preventive method in a city centerincluding whole primary schools.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: In 2007, of the 2348 first grade primary school children(born in 1999) being teached at 37 primary school at Kirikkale city center, 480 were selected, andequally divided as control and study groups.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, various primitive preventive methods could need to besupported by the risk-based additional preventive applications in high risk population.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the medium-and long-term effect ofbrush on fluoride gel application which is a simplified preventive method in a city centerincluding whole primary schools. Materials and Methods: In 2007, of the 2348 first grade primary school children(born in 1999) being teached at 37 primary school at Kirikkale city center, 480 were selected, andequally divided as control and study groups. While in study group, all children had routinely get brush on fluoride gel application four-times ayear during 3 years (total 12 times), using 2 percent neutral fluoride gel; others were subjected tooral hygiene education at least one time a year. All the examination procedures were yearlyperformed using World Health Organization (WHO) criteria at the first-second and fourth year. Results: While there was no statistically significant difference between the groups at baseline,it was not true at 4th years DMFT results (DMFT values for control and studygroups were 0,33±0,72 and 0,69±1,15, respectively. p=0,001). Similar trend was observedat baseline and 4th year results for caries prevalence (p values for baseline and 4th year comparisons were p=0,049 and p=0,004, respectively). Conclusions: Considering as a simplified oral health preventive programs whichmay be important to established tooth-brushing habit could lead to an observational differencein caries prevalence. However, various primitive preventive methods could need to besupported by the risk-based additional preventive applications in high risk population.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışma; bir il merkezindeki tüm ilköğretim okullarını kapsayan, basitleştirilmiş birkoruyucu diş hekimliği yöntemi olan Fırça ile florlu jel uygulamasının orta ve uzun süreçtekietkilerinin değerlendirilmesi amacıyla planlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: 2007 yılında Kırıkkale ili merkezine bağlı ilköğretim birinci sınıftaöğrenim gören çocuklardan, çalışma ve kontrol grubuna eşit dağılmak üzere toplam 480çocuk çalışmaya dâhil edildi. Çalışma grubuna %2lik nötral florlu jelin diş fırçası ile çocuklarabirebir fırçalatılması (brush-on gel application) yöntemi ile yılda 4 defa ve 3 yıl boyunca olmaküzere toplam 12 uygulama yapılırken, kontrol grubuna ise yılda en az bir kere sınıf ortamındafırçalama eğitimi verildi. Grupların başlangıç, birinci, ikinci ve dördüncü yıl muayeneleri DünyaSağlık Örgütünün (DSÖ) muayene kriterlerine göre gerçekleştirildi. Bulgular: Grupların başlangıç, birinci ve ikinci yıldaki DMFT değerleri arasında istatistikselolarak anlamlı farklılık mevcut değilken, dördüncü yıldaki DMFT değerleri (sırasıyla 0,33±0,72 ve0,69±1,15) arasında anlamlı farklılık bulundu (p=0,001). Grupların başlangıç ve ikinci yıldakiçürük yaygınlık yüzdeleri arasında anlamlı farklılık gözlenmezken, ikinci ve dördüncü yılındakiçürük yaygınlık yüzdeleri arasında anlamlı farklılık mevcuttur (sırasıyla p=0,049 ve p=0,004). Sonuçlar: İlköğretim okullarında gecikmiş tip hijyen eğitiminin de verilebildiği basitleştirilmişkoruyucu uygulamalar, çürük artışının kontrol altına alınabilmesi açısından bir fırsat oluşturabilir.Bununla beraber bu tip basit yöntemler, yüksek çürük riskli hastalarda yetersizdirler ve risk bazlıkoruyucu yöntemlerin desteğine ihtiyaç duyarlar.

🔖

Cite This Article

DÜLGERGİL, Ç. T., ERCAN, E., DALLI, M., HAMDİ, M. M., TÜRKOĞLU, Ö. (2022). İlköğretİm okullarında standart bİr koruyucu yöntem olarak fırça İle flor jel uygulamasının değerlendİrİlmesİ: dört yıllık alan çalışması sonuçları. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 1, 37–46. https://ajindex.com/articles/477098

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Dye BA, Arevalo O, Vargas CM. Trends in paediatric dental caries by poverty status in the United States, 1988- 1994 and 1999-2004. Int J Paediatr Dent 2010;20:132-143
  2. Dye BA, Tan S, Smith V, Lewis BG, Barker LK, Thornton-Evans G, et al. Trends in oral health status: United States, 1988-1994 and 1999-2004. Vital Health Stat 11 2007:1-92
  3. Marthaler TM. Changes in dental caries 1953-2003. Caries Res 2004;38:173-181
  4. Marthaler TM, O’Mullane DM, Vrbic V. The prevalence of dental caries in Europe 1990-1995. ORCA Saturday afternoon symposium 1995. Caries Res 1996;30:237-255
  5. Petersen PE. Changing oral health profiles of children in Central and Eastern Europe–Challenges for the 21st century. IC Digest 2003;2:12-13
  6. Reich E. Trends in caries and periodontal health epidemiology in Europe. Int Dent J 2001;51:392-398
  7. Gökalp S, Doğan BG, Tekçiçek M, Berberoğlu A, Ünlüer Ş. Erişkin ve Yaşlılarda Ağız-Diş Sağlığı Profili Türkiye-2004. Hacettepe Dişhek Fak Derg 2007;31:11-18
  8. Edelstein BL. The dental caries pandemic and disparities problem. BMC Oral Health 2006;6 Suppl 1:S2
  9. Pack AR. Dental services and needs in developing countries. Int Dent J 1998;48:239-247
  10. Petersen PE. Global policy for improvement of oral health in the 21st century--implications to oral health research of World Health Assembly 2007, World Health Organization. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2009;37:1-8
  11. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Oral Health in America: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institute of Health, 2000
  12. Savage MF, Lee JY, Kotch JB, Vann WF, Jr. Early preventive dental visits: effects on subsequent utilization and costs. Pediatrics 2004;114:e418-423
  13. Borreani E, Jones K, Wright D, Scambler S, Gallagher JE. Improving access to dental care for older people. Dent Update 2010;37:297-298, 301-292
  14. Petersen PE, Kandelman D, Arpin S, Ogawa H. Global oral health of older people--call for public health action. Community Dent Health 2010;27:257-267
  15. Petersen PE, Yamamoto T. Improving the oral health of older people: the approach of the WHO Global Oral Health Programme. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2005;33:81-92
  16. Horowitz HS, Heifetz SB, McClendon BJ, Viegas AR, Guimaraes LO, Lopes ES. Evaluation of self-administered prophylaxis and supervised toothbrushing with acidulated phosphate fluoride. Caries Res 1