Comparison of Contributing Risk Factors for Primary Tooth Caries in Down Syndrome and Non-Special Health Needs Children.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Pediatric dentistry Pub Date : 2022-09-15
Keri Discepolo, Camille Herzog, Nina K Anderson, Neeta Chandwani
{"title":"Comparison of Contributing Risk Factors for Primary Tooth Caries in Down Syndrome and Non-Special Health Needs Children.","authors":"Keri Discepolo,&nbsp;Camille Herzog,&nbsp;Nina K Anderson,&nbsp;Neeta Chandwani","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To evaluate decayed, missing, and filled surfaces in primary teeth (dmfs) in Down syndrome subjects (DS) compared to typically developed (TD) controls using analysis. <b>Methods:</b> A retrospective study of 440 matched subjects (220 DS and 220 TD) was conducted. Categorical variables were evaluated for association with dental caries, with mean dmfs as the main outcome measure. Pearson's chi-square and independent sample t-tests for unequal variances for means were employed. <b>Results:</b> Overall, the TD control group was found to have significantly higher mean dmfs scores than the DS group: TD Equals 17.65 (mean dmfs), 95% confidence interval (CI) equals 15.48 to 19.90; DS equals 10.30 (mean dmfs), at 95% CI equals 7.96 to 12.78, (P<0.001). However, when controlled for the variable factors African American status (P=0.11), Hispanic status (P=0.07) and income level at or below 200 percent of poverty level (P=0.24) there was no significant difference in mean dmfs. <b>Conclusions:</b> In the study population DS and TD exhibited dissimilar dmfs scores, while when taking into consideration social and economic factors dmfs was equivalent. Caries risk factors modulate disease experience and should be considered in all population-specific studies. Patients with multiple high-risk factors should be treated as such, regardless of DS status.</p>","PeriodicalId":19863,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate decayed, missing, and filled surfaces in primary teeth (dmfs) in Down syndrome subjects (DS) compared to typically developed (TD) controls using analysis. Methods: A retrospective study of 440 matched subjects (220 DS and 220 TD) was conducted. Categorical variables were evaluated for association with dental caries, with mean dmfs as the main outcome measure. Pearson's chi-square and independent sample t-tests for unequal variances for means were employed. Results: Overall, the TD control group was found to have significantly higher mean dmfs scores than the DS group: TD Equals 17.65 (mean dmfs), 95% confidence interval (CI) equals 15.48 to 19.90; DS equals 10.30 (mean dmfs), at 95% CI equals 7.96 to 12.78, (P<0.001). However, when controlled for the variable factors African American status (P=0.11), Hispanic status (P=0.07) and income level at or below 200 percent of poverty level (P=0.24) there was no significant difference in mean dmfs. Conclusions: In the study population DS and TD exhibited dissimilar dmfs scores, while when taking into consideration social and economic factors dmfs was equivalent. Caries risk factors modulate disease experience and should be considered in all population-specific studies. Patients with multiple high-risk factors should be treated as such, regardless of DS status.

唐氏综合征与非特殊健康需要儿童乳牙龋病危险因素比较
目的:通过分析评估唐氏综合征(DS)患者乳牙(dmfs)的龋坏、缺失和填充表面,并将其与典型发育(TD)对照组进行比较。方法:对440例匹配对象(中老年220例,中老年220例)进行回顾性研究。分类变量评估与龋病的关系,以平均dmfs作为主要结果测量。采用皮尔逊卡方检验和独立样本t检验,对均值进行不等方差检验。结果:总体而言,TD对照组的平均dmfs评分显著高于DS组:TD = 17.65(平均dmfs), 95%置信区间(CI) = 15.48 ~ 19.90;DS = 10.30(平均dmfs), 95% CI = 7.96 ~ 12.78, (p结论:在研究人群中,DS和TD表现出不同的dmfs评分,但考虑社会和经济因素时,dmfs是相等的。龋齿风险因素调节疾病经历,应在所有人群特异性研究中予以考虑。对于具有多种高危因素的患者,无论其退行性椎体滑移状态如何,均应按高危因素进行治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pediatric dentistry
Pediatric dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINEPEDIATRI-PEDIATRICS
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
74
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pediatric Dentistry is the official publication of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, the American Board of Pediatric Dentistry and the College of Diplomates of the American Board of Pediatric Dentistry. It is published bi-monthly and is internationally recognized as the leading journal in the area of pediatric dentistry. The journal promotes the practice, education and research specifically related to the specialty of pediatric dentistry. This peer-reviewed journal features scientific articles, case reports and abstracts of current pediatric dental research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信