S A Eklund1, J L Pittman, K E Heller. 1. University of Michigan, School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Ann Arbor 48109-2029, USA. saeklund@umich.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates the association between use of professionally applied topical fluoride and use of interproximal restorations in primary and permanent teeth of children. METHODS: Insurance claims from 15,190 children, for treatment provided by 1,556 different dentists, were analyzed to look for associations between frequency of use of professionally applied topical fluoride and use of interproximal restorations. The average follow-up period for the children included in the analysis was 5.3 years, with the range from 3.0 to 7.9 years. RESULTS: Both tabular and regression results failed to demonstrate an association between frequency of use of professionally applied topical fluoride and use of interproximal restorations in either the primary or permanent dentition. The most powerful predictor of restorative care for these children was the overall propensity of the dentist to place restorations in children. CONCLUSIONS: In this group of insured children, we were unable to find an association between the frequency of use of professionally applied topical fluoride and restorative care. Further, despite numerous recommendations that professionally applied topical fluorides should be used only in moderate- and high-caries children, approximately two-thirds of these children received topical fluoride at every recall visit, nearly two times per year.
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates the association between use of professionally applied topical fluoride and use of interproximal restorations in primary and permanent teeth of children. METHODS: Insurance claims from 15,190 children, for treatment provided by 1,556 different dentists, were analyzed to look for associations between frequency of use of professionally applied topical fluoride and use of interproximal restorations. The average follow-up period for the children included in the analysis was 5.3 years, with the range from 3.0 to 7.9 years. RESULTS: Both tabular and regression results failed to demonstrate an association between frequency of use of professionally applied topical fluoride and use of interproximal restorations in either the primary or permanent dentition. The most powerful predictor of restorative care for these children was the overall propensity of the dentist to place restorations in children. CONCLUSIONS: In this group of insured children, we were unable to find an association between the frequency of use of professionally applied topical fluoride and restorative care. Further, despite numerous recommendations that professionally applied topical fluorides should be used only in moderate- and high-caries children, approximately two-thirds of these children received topical fluoride at every recall visit, nearly two times per year.
Authors: J L Riley; Joshua S Richman; D Brad Rindal; Jeffrey L Fellows; Vibeke Qvist; Gregg H Gilbert; Valeria V Gordan Journal: Oral Health Prev Dent Date: 2010 Impact factor: 1.256
Authors: David Grembowski; Charles Spiekerman; Michael A del Aguila; Maxwell Anderson; Debra Reynolds; Allison Ellersick; James Foster; Leslie Choate Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: Miriam Del Socorro Herrera; Carlo Eduardo Medina-Solís; América Patricia Pontigo-Loyola; Rubén de la Rosa-Santillana; Leticia Ávila-Burgos; Rogelio José Scougall-Vilchis; Sonia Márquez-Rodríguez; Mirna Minaya-Sánchez; Alejandro José Casanova-Rosado Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-08-11 Impact factor: 3.390