| Literature DB >> 20226082 |
Thoa C Nguyen1, Dick J Witter, Ewald M Bronkhorst, Nhan B Truong, Nico H J Creugers.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Before strategies or protocols for oral health care can be advised at population level, epidemiological information on tooth decay patterns and its effects on oral function are indispensable. The aim of this study was to investigate influences of socio-demographic variables on the prevalence of decayed, missing, filled (DMF) and sound teeth (St) and to determine the relative risk of teeth in different dental regions for D, M, and F, of adults living in urban and rural areas in Southern Vietnam.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20226082 PMCID: PMC2841650 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6831-10-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Number of selected factories or institutions (with adjacent neighbourhoods) and number of selected subjects in the urban and rural areas of the three provinces Cantho, Angiang, and HCM
| Urban | Rural | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Province | Factories/Institutions | Number of | Communes | Number of | Total |
| Cantho | 5 | 957 | 7 | 707 | 1664 |
| Angiang | 5 | 564 | 9 | 631 | 1195 |
| HCM | 5 | 591 | 5 | 600 | 1191 |
| Total | 15 | 2112 | 21 | 1938 | 4050 |
Number of participants and response rate (%) of invited subjects per province
| Provinces | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Residence | ||||
| Urban | 703 (73) | 446 (79) | 412 (70) | 1555 (74) |
| Rural | 538 (76) | 556 (88) | 418 (70) | 1518 (78) |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 603 (75) | 495 (78) | 384 (65) | 1482 (73) |
| Female | 638 (77) | 507 (80) | 446 (75) | 1591 (77) |
| Total | 1242 (75) | 1002 (84) | 830 (70) | 3073 (76) |
Constructed socio-economic status (SES) classification (modified Kuppuswamy classification)
| Higher education (level ≥ 12*) | 6 |
| College (level 6 to 12*) | 5 |
| Primary school (level 1 to 5*) | 3 |
| Informal education (i.e. self learning); literate | 2 |
| No formal education | 1 |
| Professional and skilled | 4 |
| Business, household keeper | 3 |
| Retired/unemployed | 2 |
| Semiskilled and unskilled | 1 |
| Income covers expenses; no loans needed | 4 |
| Income does not cover expenses; no loans needed | 3 |
| Income covers expenses; loans needed incidentally | 2 |
| Income does not cover expenses; loans needed regularly | 1 |
| High | 9 - 14 |
| Middle | 7, 8 |
| Low | 3 - 6 |
*Education levels based on the Vietnamese classification system
Percentage of subjects with decayed, missing, and filled teeth according to age category and residence
| Number of subjects | Percentage of subjects with | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age group | ||||
| 20-29 | 509 | 32 | 70 | 15 |
| 30-39 | 607 | 33 | 78 | 18 |
| 40-49 | 619 | 28 | 91 | 17 |
| 50-59 | 676 | 26 | 92 | 15 |
| ≥ 60 | 554 | 30 | 96 | 8 |
| Residence | ||||
| Urban | 1381 | 32 | 87 | 24 |
| Rural | 1584 | 28 | 85 | 6 |
Figure 1Mean number of decayed (D), missing (M), filled (F), and sound (S.
Figure 2Mean number of decayed (D), missing (M), filled (F), and sound (S.
Figure 3Mean number of decayed (D), missing (M), filled (F), and sound (S.
Figure 4Mean number of decayed (D), missing (M), filled (F), and sound (S.
Odds ratios of dichotomized D, M, and F ratios, 95% confidence intervals (CI) and level of significance for the whole dentition, and for the anterior, premolar and molar regions separately
| D | M | F | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (per year) | 0.996 | 0.990-1.001 | 1.008 | 1.002 - 1.014 | ** | 0.985 | 0.997 - 0.993 | *** | |
| Femalea | 1.37 | 1.15 - 1.63 | *** | 0.60 | 0.50 - 0.72 | *** | 1.87 | 1.49 - 2.35 | *** |
| Urbanb | 0.71 | 0.60 - 0.85 | *** | 0.97 | 0.80 - 1.18 | 4.18 | 3.28 - 5.34 | *** | |
| Angiangc | 0.98 | 0.80 - 1.19 | 1.30 | 1.04 - 1.62 | * | 0.41 | 0.31 - 0.55 | *** | |
| HCMc | 0.99 | 0.80 - 1.23 | 1.13 | 0.89 - 1.44 | 0.88 | 0.68 - 1.13 | |||
| SES highd | 0.89 | 0.71 - 1.10 | 0.84 | 0.65 - 1.08 | 1.74 | 1.36 - 2.21 | *** | ||
| SES lowd | 0.80 | 0.64 - 1.00 | 1.39 | 1.10 - 1.75 | ** | 0.34 | 0.22 - 0.53 | *** | |
| Age (per year) | 0.988 | 0.981 - 0.995 | *** | 1.024 | 1.016 - 1.031 | *** | 0.947 | 0.933 - 0.962 | |
| Femalea | 1.20 | 0.97 - 1.48 | 0.67 | 0.54 - 0.83 | *** | 3.13 | 2.00 - 4.88 | *** | |
| Urbanb | 0.70 | 0.57 - 0.87 | *** | 1.10 | 0.88 - 1.38 | 3.78 | 2.45 - 5.84 | *** | |
| Angiangc | 1.11 | 0.86 - 1.42 | 1.10 | 0.85 - 1.42 | 0.39 | 0.23 - 0.67 | *** | ||
| HCMc | 0.74 | 0.57 - 0.97 | * | 1.45 | 1.11 - 1.90 | ** | 0.94 | 0.60 - 1.46 | |
| SES highd | 0.77 | 0.59 - 1.00 | 1.13 | 0.85 - 1.50 | 1.84 | 1.20 - 2.82 | ** | ||
| SES lowd | 0.78 | 0.60 - 1.02 | 1.36 | 1.04 - 1.78 | * | 0.63 | 0.33 - 1.21 | ||
| Age (per year) | 0.984 | 0.977 - 0.992 | *** | 1.024 | 1.016 - 1.031 | *** | 0.966 | 0.951 - 0.981 | *** |
| Femalea | 1.52 | 1.24 - 1.87 | *** | 0.58 | 0.47 - 0.72 | *** | 2.08 | 1.37 - 3.16 | *** |
| Urbanb | 0.75 | 0.61 - 0.93 | ** | 1.05 | 0.85 - 1.30 | 4.48 | 2.77 - 7.25 | *** | |
| Angiangc | 1.10 | 0.86 - 1.41 | 1.12 | 0.87 - 1.44 | 0.38 | 0.22 - 0.66 | *** | ||
| HCMc | 0.90 | 0.70 - 1.16 | 1.32 | 1.01 - 1.72 | * | 0.65 | 0.41 - 1.03 | ||
| SES highd | 1.00 | 0.77 - 1.30 | 0.84 | 0.64 - 1.11 | 1.54 | 1.01 - 2.35 | * | ||
| SES lowd | 1.02 | 0.78 - 1.33 | 1.09 | 0.83 - 1.43 | 0.22 | 0.08 - 0.62 | ** | ||
| Age (per year) | 0.979 | 0.974 - 0.984 | *** | 1.025 | 1.019 - 1.031 | *** | 0.987 | 0.979 - 0.996 | ** |
| Femalea | 1.21 | 1.04 - 1.42 | * | 0.69 | 0.59 - 0.82 | *** | 1.69 | 1.32 - 2.17 | *** |
| Urbanb | 0.66 | 0.56 - 0.78 | *** | 1.05 | 0.88 - 1.24 | 4.01 | 3.04 - 5.28 | *** | |
| Angiangc | 1.08 | 0.89 - 1.30 | 1.14 | 0.94 - 1.39 | 0.42 | 0.30 - 0.59 | *** | ||
| HCMc | 1.05 | 0.86 - 1.28 | 1.07 | 0.87 - 1.32 | 0.88 | 0.67 - 1.16 | |||
| SES highd | 0.91 | 0.74 - 1.11 | 0.92 | 0.74 - 1.14 | 1.66 | 1.28 - 2.17 | *** | ||
| SES lowd | 0.91 | 0.74 - 1.12 | 1.28 | 1.03 - 1.58 | * | 0.24 | 0.14 - 0.43 | *** |
* = P ≤ 0.05; ** = P ≤ 0.01; *** = P ≤ 0.001
References (OR = 1) respectively: a male, b rural, c Cantho province, d SES middle
Meaning of OR for example for the Mratio for the molar region: every year older gives a 2.5% higher chance for missing all non-sound molar teeth. The chance for females compared to males on this event is 31% lower, whereas subject with low SES are estimated to have a 28% higher chance compared to middle SES. Other independent variables showed no statistical significant effects.
Difference in percentage for molars being decayed, missing or filled as compared to premolars and anterior teeth.
| Comparison | Mean difference | 95% Confidence Interval | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Upper jaw | |||
| Drel | |||
| Molars - premolars | 4.6 | 3.8 - 5.4 | < 0.001 |
| Molars - anterior teeth | 4.5 | 3.6 - 5.3 | < 0.001 |
| Mrel | |||
| Molars - premolars | 1.5 | 1.4 - 1.6 | < 0.001 |
| Molars - anterior teeth | 1.5 | 1.4 - 1.6 | < 0.001 |
| Frel | |||
| Molars - premolars | 0.5 | 0.3 - 0.8 | < 0.001 |
| Molars - anterior teeth | 0.3 | 0.0 - 0.5 | 0.06 |
| Lower jaw | |||
| Drel | |||
| Molars - premolars | 9.1 | 8.3 - 10 | < 0.001 |
| Molars - anterior teeth | 11.6 | 10.8 - 12.5 | < 0.001 |
| Mrel | |||
| Molars - premolars | 2.8 | 2.7 - 2.9 | < 0.001 |
| Molars - anterior teeth | 3.3 | 3.2 - 3.4 | < 0.001 |
| Frel | |||
| Molars - premolars | 1.6 | 1.3 - 1.9 | < 0.001 |
| Molars - anterior teeth | 2.1 | 1.9 - 2.5 | < 0.001 |