澳大利亚成年人在获得牙科保健方面的社会不平等现象。

IF 2.2 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
L M Jamieson, L Luzzi, G C Mejia, S Chrisopoulos, X Ju
{"title":"澳大利亚成年人在获得牙科保健方面的社会不平等现象。","authors":"L M Jamieson, L Luzzi, G C Mejia, S Chrisopoulos, X Ju","doi":"10.1177/23800844241253274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Social inequities in dental caries are reflected by both inequities in the social structures that contribute to disease severity and inequities in the provision of dental care. This study aimed to describe social differentials in the dental caries experience among Australian adults across a 13-y period and to examine if the highest magnitude of oral health inequities persisted across dental caries prevalence (decayed teeth [DT]) or its management (missing teeth [MT], filled teeth [FT]).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were from 2 population-based cross-sectional surveys of Australian adult oral health conducted in 2004-2006 (National Survey of Adult Oral Health-1 [NSAOH-1], n = 5,505) and 2017-2018 (NSAOH-2, n = 5,022). In each survey, representative samples of adults were obtained through a 3-stage, stratified sample design within metropolitan and regional areas in each state/territory. Clinical outcomes included the prevalence and mean of DT, MT, FT, and DMFT. Equivalized household income was grouped into approximately quartiles from low to high.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all income quartiles, the mean DT and % DT >0 was higher in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1. The increase in prevalence was highest in the third highest income group (prevalence difference [PD] = 8.4, from 24.1 to 32.5). Similarly, % MT >0 was lower in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1 across all income groups, with the decrease most marked for the lowest income group (PD = -6.5, from 74.1 to 67.8). Across all income quartiles, % FT >0 was lower in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1. The decrease was the most marked for the lowest income group (PD = -8.9, from 81.1 to 72.2).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings confirm that although oral health inequities decreased for the most extreme management outcome of dental caries (MT), inequities increased for experience of that disease (DT) and the more conservative management of dental caries (FT). For all D, M, and F components (DMFT), inequities between the lowest and highest household income groups increased from 2004-2006 to 2017-2018.</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>This study found that social inequities in oral health (experience of untreated dental caries and missing teeth) increased between the most socially advantaged and disadvantaged groups between 2004-2006 and 2017-2018. This suggests that models of dental service provision in Australia are increasingly benefitting those who can afford and access the care and who arguably need the services less than their less socially advantaged counterparts do.</p>","PeriodicalId":14783,"journal":{"name":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Inequities in Access to Dental Care in Australian Adults over Time.\",\"authors\":\"L M Jamieson, L Luzzi, G C Mejia, S Chrisopoulos, X Ju\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23800844241253274\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Social inequities in dental caries are reflected by both inequities in the social structures that contribute to disease severity and inequities in the provision of dental care. This study aimed to describe social differentials in the dental caries experience among Australian adults across a 13-y period and to examine if the highest magnitude of oral health inequities persisted across dental caries prevalence (decayed teeth [DT]) or its management (missing teeth [MT], filled teeth [FT]).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were from 2 population-based cross-sectional surveys of Australian adult oral health conducted in 2004-2006 (National Survey of Adult Oral Health-1 [NSAOH-1], n = 5,505) and 2017-2018 (NSAOH-2, n = 5,022). In each survey, representative samples of adults were obtained through a 3-stage, stratified sample design within metropolitan and regional areas in each state/territory. Clinical outcomes included the prevalence and mean of DT, MT, FT, and DMFT. Equivalized household income was grouped into approximately quartiles from low to high.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all income quartiles, the mean DT and % DT >0 was higher in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1. The increase in prevalence was highest in the third highest income group (prevalence difference [PD] = 8.4, from 24.1 to 32.5). Similarly, % MT >0 was lower in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1 across all income groups, with the decrease most marked for the lowest income group (PD = -6.5, from 74.1 to 67.8). Across all income quartiles, % FT >0 was lower in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1. The decrease was the most marked for the lowest income group (PD = -8.9, from 81.1 to 72.2).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings confirm that although oral health inequities decreased for the most extreme management outcome of dental caries (MT), inequities increased for experience of that disease (DT) and the more conservative management of dental caries (FT). For all D, M, and F components (DMFT), inequities between the lowest and highest household income groups increased from 2004-2006 to 2017-2018.</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>This study found that social inequities in oral health (experience of untreated dental caries and missing teeth) increased between the most socially advantaged and disadvantaged groups between 2004-2006 and 2017-2018. This suggests that models of dental service provision in Australia are increasingly benefitting those who can afford and access the care and who arguably need the services less than their less socially advantaged counterparts do.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JDR Clinical & Translational Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JDR Clinical & Translational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844241253274\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844241253274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:龋齿方面的社会不平等反映在导致疾病严重程度的社会结构不平等和牙科保健提供方面的不平等。本研究旨在描述澳大利亚成年人在 13 年的龋齿经历中存在的社会差异,并研究口腔健康不平等的最大程度是否持续存在于龋齿患病率(蛀牙 [DT])或其管理(缺牙 [MT]、补牙 [FT])中:数据来自2004-2006年(全国成人口腔健康调查-1[NSAOH-1],n=5505)和2017-2018年(全国成人口腔健康调查-2,n=5022)进行的两次基于人口的澳大利亚成人口腔健康横断面调查。在每次调查中,均在各州/地区的大都市和区域范围内通过 3 个阶段的分层抽样设计获得了具有代表性的成人样本。临床结果包括 DT、MT、FT 和 DMFT 的患病率和平均值。等值家庭收入大约从低到高分为四等分:在所有收入四分位数中,NSAOH-2 的 DT 平均值和 DT >0% 均高于 NSAOH-1。第三高收入组的患病率增幅最大(患病率差值 [PD] = 8.4,从 24.1 增至 32.5)。同样,在所有收入组别中,NSAOH-2 中 MT >0 的百分比低于 NSAOH-1,最低收入组别下降最为明显(PD = -6.5,从 74.1 降至 67.8)。在所有收入四分位数中,NSAOH-2 中 FT >0 的百分比低于 NSAOH-1。最低收入组的下降最为明显(PD = -8.9,从 81.1 降至 72.2):研究结果证实,虽然最极端的龋齿管理结果(MT)的口腔健康不公平现象有所减少,但该疾病的经历(DT)和更保守的龋齿管理结果(FT)的不公平现象却有所增加。就所有 D、M 和 F 部分(DMFT)而言,最低和最高家庭收入群体之间的不平等从 2004-2006 年到 2017-2018 年有所增加:本研究发现,2004-2006 年至 2017-2018 年期间,社会地位最有利群体和弱势群体之间在口腔健康方面的社会不平等(未治疗龋齿和缺失牙的经历)有所增加。这表明,澳大利亚的牙科服务提供模式正越来越多地惠及那些能够负担得起和获得医疗服务的人,而与社会地位较低的人相比,这些人对服务的需求可能更少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social Inequities in Access to Dental Care in Australian Adults over Time.

Introduction: Social inequities in dental caries are reflected by both inequities in the social structures that contribute to disease severity and inequities in the provision of dental care. This study aimed to describe social differentials in the dental caries experience among Australian adults across a 13-y period and to examine if the highest magnitude of oral health inequities persisted across dental caries prevalence (decayed teeth [DT]) or its management (missing teeth [MT], filled teeth [FT]).

Methods: Data were from 2 population-based cross-sectional surveys of Australian adult oral health conducted in 2004-2006 (National Survey of Adult Oral Health-1 [NSAOH-1], n = 5,505) and 2017-2018 (NSAOH-2, n = 5,022). In each survey, representative samples of adults were obtained through a 3-stage, stratified sample design within metropolitan and regional areas in each state/territory. Clinical outcomes included the prevalence and mean of DT, MT, FT, and DMFT. Equivalized household income was grouped into approximately quartiles from low to high.

Results: Across all income quartiles, the mean DT and % DT >0 was higher in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1. The increase in prevalence was highest in the third highest income group (prevalence difference [PD] = 8.4, from 24.1 to 32.5). Similarly, % MT >0 was lower in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1 across all income groups, with the decrease most marked for the lowest income group (PD = -6.5, from 74.1 to 67.8). Across all income quartiles, % FT >0 was lower in NSAOH-2 than in NSAOH-1. The decrease was the most marked for the lowest income group (PD = -8.9, from 81.1 to 72.2).

Conclusion: The findings confirm that although oral health inequities decreased for the most extreme management outcome of dental caries (MT), inequities increased for experience of that disease (DT) and the more conservative management of dental caries (FT). For all D, M, and F components (DMFT), inequities between the lowest and highest household income groups increased from 2004-2006 to 2017-2018.

Knowledge transfer statement: This study found that social inequities in oral health (experience of untreated dental caries and missing teeth) increased between the most socially advantaged and disadvantaged groups between 2004-2006 and 2017-2018. This suggests that models of dental service provision in Australia are increasingly benefitting those who can afford and access the care and who arguably need the services less than their less socially advantaged counterparts do.

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
JDR Clinical & Translational Research
JDR Clinical & Translational Research DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: JDR Clinical & Translational Research seeks to publish the highest quality research articles on clinical and translational research including all of the dental specialties and implantology. Examples include behavioral sciences, cariology, oral & pharyngeal cancer, disease diagnostics, evidence based health care delivery, human genetics, health services research, periodontal diseases, oral medicine, radiology, and pathology. The JDR Clinical & Translational Research expands on its research content by including high-impact health care and global oral health policy statements and systematic reviews of clinical concepts affecting clinical practice. Unique to the JDR Clinical & Translational Research are advances in clinical and translational medicine articles created to focus on research with an immediate potential to affect clinical therapy outcomes.
×
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