牙医对氟化物固牙机制的了解

U. Kaczmarek, W. Kowalczyk, D. Gozdowski, D. Olczak-Kowalczyk
{"title":"牙医对氟化物固牙机制的了解","authors":"U. Kaczmarek, W. Kowalczyk, D. Gozdowski, D. Olczak-Kowalczyk","doi":"10.25121/ns.2018.23.3.102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The use of age- and risk-adjusted caries prevention requires up-to-date knowledge on the cariostatic effects of fluoride, as well as the methods and safety of fluoride prophylaxis. Aim. The aim of the study was to assess dentists’ knowledge of the safety and mechanism of anticaries effects of fluoride. Material and methods. An anonymous questionnaire was conducted among 212 dentists participating in dental training. The questions included in the questionnaire related to knowledge about water fluoridation, fluoride cariostatic mechanisms and the safety of fluoride prophylaxis. The chi-square test and the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis. A significance level of 0.05 was used. Results. Incorrect knowledge about water fluoridation was demonstrated by 26.9% of respondents in the country and 16.0% of respondents in Europe. Most respondents (80.7%) reported higher efficacy of exogenous vs endogenous anticaries approaches, and more than half of respondents (59.0%) considered the processes of remineralisation and demineralisation as the most important anticaries activity. Almost all respondents (95.7%) agreed that the use of fluoride for caries prevention is controversial, mainly due to its dose-dependent therapeutic or toxic effects (85.4%). According to about 20% of respondents, cariostatic fluoride doses have adverse effects on the general health, mainly in the form of bone fragility (10.4%). Conclusions. Lack of correct knowledge about the dominant cariostatic effects of fluoride may result in the choice of an inappropriate preventive method or avoiding local application of fluoride preparations for fear of adverse systemic effects, which may in turn lead to increased caries prevalence in a given population.","PeriodicalId":445226,"journal":{"name":"Nowa Stomatologia","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dentists’ knowledge of fluoride cariostatic mechanisms\",\"authors\":\"U. Kaczmarek, W. Kowalczyk, D. Gozdowski, D. Olczak-Kowalczyk\",\"doi\":\"10.25121/ns.2018.23.3.102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction. The use of age- and risk-adjusted caries prevention requires up-to-date knowledge on the cariostatic effects of fluoride, as well as the methods and safety of fluoride prophylaxis. Aim. The aim of the study was to assess dentists’ knowledge of the safety and mechanism of anticaries effects of fluoride. Material and methods. An anonymous questionnaire was conducted among 212 dentists participating in dental training. The questions included in the questionnaire related to knowledge about water fluoridation, fluoride cariostatic mechanisms and the safety of fluoride prophylaxis. The chi-square test and the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis. A significance level of 0.05 was used. Results. Incorrect knowledge about water fluoridation was demonstrated by 26.9% of respondents in the country and 16.0% of respondents in Europe. Most respondents (80.7%) reported higher efficacy of exogenous vs endogenous anticaries approaches, and more than half of respondents (59.0%) considered the processes of remineralisation and demineralisation as the most important anticaries activity. Almost all respondents (95.7%) agreed that the use of fluoride for caries prevention is controversial, mainly due to its dose-dependent therapeutic or toxic effects (85.4%). According to about 20% of respondents, cariostatic fluoride doses have adverse effects on the general health, mainly in the form of bone fragility (10.4%). Conclusions. Lack of correct knowledge about the dominant cariostatic effects of fluoride may result in the choice of an inappropriate preventive method or avoiding local application of fluoride preparations for fear of adverse systemic effects, which may in turn lead to increased caries prevalence in a given population.\",\"PeriodicalId\":445226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nowa Stomatologia\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nowa Stomatologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25121/ns.2018.23.3.102\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nowa Stomatologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25121/ns.2018.23.3.102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

介绍。使用根据年龄和风险调整的龋齿预防方法需要对氟化物的龋齿作用以及氟化物预防的方法和安全性有最新的了解。的目标。这项研究的目的是评估牙医对氟化物的安全性和抗蛀牙作用机制的认识。材料和方法。我们对212名参加牙科培训的牙医进行了匿名问卷调查。调查问卷中的问题涉及对水氟化的认识、氟固化机制和氟预防的安全性。统计学分析采用卡方检验和Spearman等级相关系数。采用0.05的显著性水平。结果。该国26.9%的答复者和欧洲16.0%的答复者证明对水氟化的认识不正确。大多数应答者(80.7%)报告了外源性抗肿瘤方法比内源性抗肿瘤方法更有效,超过一半的应答者(59.0%)认为再矿化和脱矿化过程是最重要的抗肿瘤活性。几乎所有答复者(95.7%)都认为使用氟化物预防龋齿存在争议,主要是由于其剂量依赖性治疗或毒性作用(85.4%)。约20%的答复者表示,龋齿氟化物剂量对总体健康有不利影响,主要表现为骨质脆弱(10.4%)。结论。对氟化物的主要蛀牙作用缺乏正确的认识,可能导致选择不适当的预防方法,或因担心对全身产生不良影响而避免局部使用氟化物制剂,这反过来可能导致特定人群中龋齿患病率增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dentists’ knowledge of fluoride cariostatic mechanisms
Introduction. The use of age- and risk-adjusted caries prevention requires up-to-date knowledge on the cariostatic effects of fluoride, as well as the methods and safety of fluoride prophylaxis. Aim. The aim of the study was to assess dentists’ knowledge of the safety and mechanism of anticaries effects of fluoride. Material and methods. An anonymous questionnaire was conducted among 212 dentists participating in dental training. The questions included in the questionnaire related to knowledge about water fluoridation, fluoride cariostatic mechanisms and the safety of fluoride prophylaxis. The chi-square test and the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis. A significance level of 0.05 was used. Results. Incorrect knowledge about water fluoridation was demonstrated by 26.9% of respondents in the country and 16.0% of respondents in Europe. Most respondents (80.7%) reported higher efficacy of exogenous vs endogenous anticaries approaches, and more than half of respondents (59.0%) considered the processes of remineralisation and demineralisation as the most important anticaries activity. Almost all respondents (95.7%) agreed that the use of fluoride for caries prevention is controversial, mainly due to its dose-dependent therapeutic or toxic effects (85.4%). According to about 20% of respondents, cariostatic fluoride doses have adverse effects on the general health, mainly in the form of bone fragility (10.4%). Conclusions. Lack of correct knowledge about the dominant cariostatic effects of fluoride may result in the choice of an inappropriate preventive method or avoiding local application of fluoride preparations for fear of adverse systemic effects, which may in turn lead to increased caries prevalence in a given population.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信